- Vote 'NO!' to Government Regulation of Privacy at The Economist
- FCC Stalls on Internet Regulation; Asks for More Comments
- Why was the Volcker Commission Constrained by Obama’s Tax Pledge, but not the Simpson-Bowles?
- Daily Media Spotlight September 2, 2010
- Harry Reid Looks to Resurrect RES During Lame-Duck
- Calculating the Cost of Government (CFA Site »)
Thursday, September 2, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight September 1, 2010
-
Obama Tax Commission Report:
Baby Step Toward IRS Tax Preparation - Dina Titus Launches False Attack Ad on Joe Heck and the Taxpayer Protection Pledge
- Indiana LaunchesTransparency Website (CFA Site »)
- Rally for Jobs Kicks Off Today in Texas
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 31, 2010
- Let us All Join in on the NOT so “Green Cause”
- California Bag Ban Bill Up for Vote Today
- Norquist to Gov. Pat Quinn: Pick a Flawed Income Tax Hike and Stick With It
- Phil Moffett Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge in Kentucky Gubernatorial Race
- New Mexico Sets Trends in Transparency Websites (CFA Site »)
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
- Robert Gibbs’s Fuzzy Tax Hike Math
- Daily Media Spotlight August 30, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
- 2011 Could Be Ugly for Nevada Taxpayers
- Lame Duck Governor Ed Rendell Not Going Gently Into That Good Night – New Call for Higher Taxes
- Happy Cost of Government Day, California
- Bay Staters Spent 239 Days Paying for Government Burdens in 2010 (CFA Site »)
- Washington Welcomes Cost of Government Day (CFA Site »)
Friday, August 27, 2010
- Spill Commission Should Lift Moratorium Which Has Cost Gulf Residents 12,000 Jobs and $2.1 Billion
- Daily Media Spotlight August 26, 2010
- Why is Dan Onorato Knowingly Misleading Pennsylvania Voters?
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle
- Utah Tobacco Sellers Feeling the Impact of Tax Hikes
Thursday, August 26, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 25, 2010
- WI Democrats Launch “Blatantly False” Attack on Sean Duffy
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle (AWF Site »)
- Philly's New Blog Tax May Foreshadow Other eTaxes
- BNA: For 14 States, Existing Tax Code Leaves Room for Etax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Philly's $300 Blogger Tax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Cost of Government Day Arrives in the Commonwealth
- Pennsylvania Finally Celebrates Cost of Government Day
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
- California Budget Proposal Advocates eTax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Daily Media Spotlight August 24, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 23, 2010
- Government Workers' Pensions are Underfunded by $3 Trillion
Monday, August 23, 2010
- Fourteen Ways to Reduce Government Spending
- FCC Report on Broadband Performance: A Scare Tactic
- Sen. Al Franken Doesn’t Understand Wireless Networks...or the First Amendment
Friday, August 20, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 19, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
White House Spin Continues:
When Is an Excise Tax NOT an Excise Tax?
From Ryan Ellis on Tuesday, September 22, 2009 1:21 PM
In a truly brazen and out-of-touch move, the Obama White House continued to dig in its heels yesterday in the face of President Obama’s ridiculous assertion that an excise tax is not a tax. Below we break down how the White House staff fumbles and bumbles a defense of their boss’ willful ignorance of the English language. First, here is what the plan written by Senator Max Baucus’ staff says about the matter:
“Excise Tax. The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax...the excise tax would be assessed through the tax code and applied as an additional amount of federal tax owed.”
Now, here’s what White House spokesman Linda Douglass had to say, with our analysis:
***
The White House on Monday reiterated that it doesn't view the fee as a tax. Officials said Americans are already paying as much as $1,000 a year in higher medical costs to subsidize caring for the uninsured, and would save money if lawmakers pass the health overhaul. They noted that lower-income people would get federal help to buy insurance and avoid the penalty.
ATR: The fact that people might be paying for uncompensated care has nothing to do with the fact that the additional cost in the Baucus plan is a TAX, as the President has denied and his staff has reiterated, even in the face of plain language. Also, the fact that poorer Americans are getting subsidized doesn’t change the fact that the Baucus-Obama excise tax will fall squarely on families making less than $250,000 per year (in violation of Obama’s repeated campaign promise).
"People would be required to get health insurance, just as they are required to have auto insurance or to send their children to school," said White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass. "A fee would only be imposed on those few who could afford to purchase insurance, but refuse to do so."
ATR: An auto insurance mandate doesn’t translate into people having auto insurance, as mandate-state California demonstrates with its 18 percent uninsured motorist rate. As for the school mandate, the White House just managed to threaten the vote-moving issue of millions of home-schooling parents who don’t want the government forcing their child to go to government school.
Getting back to the excise tax, would this only apply to “a few who could afford to purchase insurance, but refuse to do so?” The excise tax would apply to any uninsured household earning income at least at the federal poverty line, which is $21,834 for a family of four with two children. The great majority of the uninsured are above the federal poverty line, and would have to pay this new excise tax.














Add a Comment