INDEX

Friday, November 6, 2009

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Monday, November 2, 2009

Friday, October 30, 2009

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Monday, October 26, 2009

Sunday, October 25, 2009

What tax hikes will be in Sen. Reid's health bill?

Search State News

Search by Tags

Email Page

Print Page

Obama Lied, His Tax Pledge Died

From John Kartch on Friday, November 6, 2009 6:34 PM

By formally endorsing the House healthcare bill today, President Barack Obama effectively announced that the central promise of his 2008 campaign was a lie.

During the campaign, Obama made a “firm pledge” not to raise “any form” of taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year:

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes” (September 12, 2008, Dover, NH)

[HTranscriptH] [HVideo clipH]

"No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama's plan will see one single penny of their tax raised," Joe Biden said, "whether it's their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax."(Joe Biden, Oct. 3, 2008, Vice Presidential Debate, St. Louis, MO)

[HTranscriptH] [HVideo ClipH]

Further, on April 15, 2009, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs was asked if the President’s tax pledge applies “to the health care bill” to which Gibbs replied:

“The statement didn’t come with caveats.” (White House Briefing) [Transcript]

Click "Read More" to see the rest..

Click here for a printable PDF of this document

What's That You Say About Avoiding Protectionism, Obama?

From Kelsey Zahourek on Friday, November 6, 2009 5:00 PM

It has become a cliché to say that history repeats itself, but sometimes the phrase is troublingly applicable. After tariffs on poultry, and then tires, now steel pipes have drawn the ire of the Obama Administration. The White House announced on Thursday that the United States will now impose import duties as high as 99% on Chinese steel. It seems funny that the President would vow to avoid the evils of protectionist policy, yet escalate a burgeoning trade war with our second biggest trading partner.

The duty will have a dramatic effect on the cost of many manufactured goods, as well as fossil fuels. Big labor scored another victory in the fight against free and open trade. This is the second tariff to be imposed at the direct request of the bosses of the United Steel Workers, after last month’s tire tax. The Obama Administration claims to want to create jobs, yet they persist upon imposing barriers to trade that will drive up costs for employers, and inevitably lead to cutbacks, and layoffs. Unemployment is at a twenty-five year high, and continues to rise. Now, the price of steel will too.

Click here to read ATR's press release

JCT Says That Pelosi-Care Could
Send the Uninsured to Prison

From Ryan Ellis on Friday, November 6, 2009 4:53 PM

This interesting nugget from the House Ways and Means Committee GOP staff:

Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.

When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.

According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.

So if you're a working family struggling to make ends meet, you either have to come up with $15,000 or potentially face jail time.

Obama Endorses Healthcare Bill
That Breaks His Own Tax Pledge

From Ryan Ellis on Friday, November 6, 2009 4:38 PM

During his campaign, President Obama made a “firm pledge” not to raise “any form” of taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year. Yet, he has just endorsed H.R. 3962, which does just that. Here’s how:

Health Insurance Mandate Taxes on Working Families

· Individual Mandate Excise Tax (Page 296): If an individual fails to obtain qualifying coverage, he must pay an income surtax equal to the lesser of 2.5 percent of modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) or the average premium. MAGI adds back in the foreign earned income exclusion and municipal bond interest. There is no exception for families making less than $250,000.

· Employer Mandate Payroll Tax (Page 275): If an employer does not pay 72.5 percent of a single employee’s health premium (65 percent of a family employee), the employer must pay an excise tax equal to the following schedule:

Payroll Tax Rate	Average Payroll Size
N/A	<$500,000
2%	$500,000-$585,000
4%	$585,000-$670,000
6%	$670,000-$750,000
8%	$750,00<

Small business owners pay their taxes on their owners’ personal tax returns. Since this provision does not exempt business owners making less than $250,000 per year, this employer mandate tax will violate President Obama’s promise in some cases.

Tax Hikes on Healthcare Spending Accounts

· Cap on Flex-Spending Account (FSA) contributions at $2500 (Page 325): Currently, the contribution level is unlimited

· Medicine Cabinet Tax (Page 324): Americans would no longer be able to purchase over-the-counter medicines with their FSA, Health Savings Account (HSA), or Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA)

· Increase in the Non-Qualified HSA Distribution Penalty from 10% to 20% (Page 326): This makes HSAs less attractive, and paves the way for HSA pre-verification

There are 30 million Americans with FSAs. About 8 million Americans have an HSA. Virtually all of them make less than $250,000 per year. These are clear tax hikes on these families

Making Legal Tax Deductions Not So Legal

· Codification of the “Economic Substance Doctrine” (Page 349): Empowers the IRS to disallow a perfectly legal tax deduction or other tax relief merely because the IRS deems that the motive of the taxpayer was not primarily business-related.

There is no exception for families making less than $250,000 per year.

If President Obama is serious about his tax pledge, he should immediately renounce the bill.

PDF Version

How Obamacare Will Lead To Less Coverage; Higher Costs

From Tim Andrews on Friday, November 6, 2009 2:20 PM

More and more evidence continues to flow in that demonstrates just how bad the Administration's plans for government run healthcare will be for Americans.

Writing in today's Washington Post, Martin Feldstein, a professor of economics at Harvard University, president emeritus of the nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research, and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers from 1982 to 1984, writes that the Administration plan could "have the unintended consequence of raising health insurance premiums and causing a decline in the number of people with insurance":

A key feature of the House and Senate health bills would prevent insurance companies from denying coverage to anyone with preexisting conditions. The new coverage would start immediately, and the premium could not reflect the individual's health condition. This well-intentioned feature would provide a strong incentive for someone who is healthy to drop his or her health insurance, saving the substantial premium costs. After all, if serious illness hit this person or a family member, he could immediately obtain coverage. As healthy individuals decline coverage in this way, insurance companies would come to have a sicker population. The higher cost of insuring that group would force insurers to raise their premiums. (Separate accident policies might develop to deal with the risk of high-cost care after accidents when there is insufficient time to buy insurance.)

The higher premium level would cause others who are currently insured to drop coverage, pushing premiums even higher. The result would be a spiral of rising premiums and shrinking numbers of insured.

He goes on to explain how the taxes levied on people who do not purchase insurance will provide insufficient incentive to prevent this from occuring, and how ultimatly this will evolve to the dreaded "public option" , irrespective of whether it is in the initial bill or not, accompanied with higher taxes, higher spending, and worse coverage for all.

Well worth a read.

ATR Supports House GOP Alternative
To Pelosi-Rangel-Obama Health Bill

From Ryan Ellis on Friday, November 6, 2009 1:41 PM

ATR sent a letter today to House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) endorsing the House GOP alternative to Pelosi-care. Click here to read the full text of that letter. Click here for a CBO score of the proposal. Click here for talking points and other background on the alternative.

Here is an excerpt of our letter:

Congratulations on your introduction of an amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3962, the House Democrat government healthcare plan. Your plan doesn’t increase taxes, won’t saddle future generations with trillions in debt, and leaves the government out of the doctor-patient relationship.

In particular, I wanted to commend you for two aspects of the bill: letting families purchase health insurance across state lines, and the improvements made to health savings accounts (HSAs).

Do House Democrats Not Care About Obama’s Tax Pledge?

From John Kartch on Friday, November 6, 2009 12:22 PM

During his campaign, President Obama made a “firm pledge” not to raise “any form” of taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year. Yet, the U.S. House of Representatives is getting ready to consider a government healthcare bill which does just that. Here’s how:

Health Insurance Mandate Taxes on Working Families

Click "Read More" to see the rest..

Click here for a printable PDF of this document

2.8 Million Jobs Lost Since "Stimulus" Signed Into Law

From John Kartch on Friday, November 6, 2009 11:49 AM

The U.S. has lost at least 2.8 million jobs since President Barack Obama signed the “stimulus” package into law on Feb. 17.

Monthly job losses reported by the BLS are as follows:

Mar:     652,000
Apr:      519,000
May:     303,000
June:   463,000
July:     304,000
Aug:     154,000
Sept:    219,000
Oct.      190,000
Total: 2,804,000

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has been content to peddle contrived terms such as “jobs created and saved” and “job-years.”

ATR’s Center for Fiscal Accountability has been tracking the questionable jobs claims by the White House here, here, and here.

UPDATE: List of Tax Hikes in House Dem
Health Bill Updated for
Managers' Amendment

From Ryan Ellis on Friday, November 6, 2009 11:31 AM

Employer Mandate Excise Tax (Page 275): If an employer does not pay 72.5 percent of a single employee’s health premium (65 percent of a family employee), the employer must pay an excise tax equal to 8 percent of average wages. Small employers (measured by payroll size) have smaller payroll tax rates of 0 percent (<$500,000), 2 percent ($500,000-$585,000), 4 percent ($585,000-$670,000), and 6 percent ($670,000-$750,000).

Individual Mandate Surtax (Page 296): If an individual fails to obtain qualifying coverage, he must pay an income surtax equal to the lesser of 2.5 percent of modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) or the average premium. MAGI adds back in the foreign earned income exclusion and municipal bond interest.

Medicine Cabinet Tax (Page 324): Non-prescription medications would no longer be able to be purchased from health savings accounts (HSAs), flexible spending accounts (FSAs), or health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs). Insulin excepted.

Cap on FSAs (Page 325): FSAs would face an annual cap of $2500 (currently uncapped).

Increased Additional Tax on Non-Qualified HSA Distributions (Page 326): Non-qualified distributions from HSAs would face an additional tax of 20 percent (current law is 10 percent). This disadvantages HSAs relative to other tax-free accounts (e.g. IRAs, 401(k)s, 529 plans, etc.)

Denial of Tax Deduction for Employer Health Plans Coordinating with Medicare Part D (Page 327): This would further erode private sector participation in delivery of Medicare services. Managers' amendment delays until 2012

Surtax on Individuals and Small Businesses (Page 336): Imposes an income surtax of 5.4 percent on MAGI over $500,000 ($1 million married filing jointly). MAGI adds back in the itemized deduction for margin loan interest. This would raise the top marginal tax rate in 2011 from 39.6 percent under current law to 45 percent—a new effective top rate.

Excise Tax on Medical Devices (Page 339): Imposes a new excise tax on medical device manufacturers equal to 2.5 percent of the wholesale price. It excludes retail sales and unspecified medical devices sold to the general public.

Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting (Page 344): Requires that 1099-MISC forms be issued to corporations as well as persons for trade or business payments. Current law limits to just persons for small business compliance complexity reasons. Also expands reporting to exchanges of property.

Repeal in Worldwide Allocation of Interest (Page 345): Repeals the worldwide allocation of interest, a corporate tax relief provision from the American Jobs Creation Act. Original bill merely delayed for nine years

Limitation on Tax Treaty Benefits for Certain Payments (Page 346): Increases taxes on U.S. employers with overseas operations looking to avoid double taxation of earnings.

Codification of the “Economic Substance Doctrine” (Page 349): Empowers the IRS to disallow a perfectly legal tax deduction or other tax relief merely because the IRS deems that the motive of the taxpayer was not primarily business-related.

Application of “More Likely Than Not” Rule (Page 357): Publicly-traded partnerships and corporations with annual gross receipts in excess of $100 million have raised standards on penalties. If there is a tax underpayment by these taxpayers, they must be able to prove that the estimated tax paid would have more likely than not been sufficient to cover final tax liability.

Deny Cellulosic Biofuel Producer Tax Credit to “Black Liquor” Resulting from Wood Pulp in Paper Production (Managers’ Amendment Page 14)

PDF Version

Jobless Numbers Prove "Stimulus" Is Anything But

From Mattie Duppler on Friday, November 6, 2009 11:16 AM

The following was originally posted at the Center for Fiscal Accountability

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released its latest jobless numbers today, showing that unemployment in America is now at a staggering 10.2 percent. These new numbers serve as a glaring reminder of the President’s claims in January that the “stimulus” plan was necessary to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent. And what about those 4 million jobs that were supposed to be “saved or created?” Shouldn’t those have kept the unemployment rate well below where it is now?

Well, yes. If the administrations’ promises of the impact the “stimulus” would have on the economy were at all true, the country would not be experiencing the worst job numbers it has seen in almost three decades. What’s more, the feeble 640,000 jobs the White House is reporting were “saved or created” by the stimulus is still a gross exaggeration. The reporting process is anything but uniform, and errors have led to artificially high numbers. Moreover, COLA raises are counted as jobs “saved” and the various ways a “job” can be calculated allow for one person to be counted a multitude of times as a job “created.”

And it doesn’t end there. Essentially, the jobs “saved or created” by the $787 billion plan rely on nothing more than fuzzy math and a lot of imagination. The new unemployment rate shows that the stimulus did nothing to stem the country’s hemorrhaging of jobs, and as the President attempts to backpedal from this most recent evidence that his economic philosophy is poorly reconciled with reality, we’ll continue to ask – where are the jobs?

<< First < Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next > Last >>

Email this Page
Name
Email Address
Friends' Name
Friends' Email

Enter the Above Characters

Email this Page