To: donjuanluis07
Sorry, but Roberts NEVER claims to say its a tax on income, that would be stupid.You're sure stubborn. How about this...
Beginning in 2014, those who do not comply with the mandate must make a [s]hared responsibility payment to the Federal Government. §5000A(b)(1). That payment, which the Act describes as a penalty, is calculated as a percentage of household income, subject to a floor based on a specified dollar amount and a ceiling based on the average annual premium the individual would have to pay for qualifying private health insurance. §5000A(c). In 2016, for example, the penalty will be 2.5 percent of an individuals household income, but no less than $695 and no more than the average yearly premium for insurance that covers 60 percent of the cost of 10 specified services (e.g., prescription drugs and hospitalization). Ibid.; 42 U. S. C. §18022. Or this...
And some individuals who are subject to the mandate are nonetheless exempt from the penaltyfor example, those with income below a certain threshold and members of Indian tribes. §5000A(e). Footnote 8 is particularly interesting...
8 In 2016, for example, individuals making $35,000 a year are expected to owe the IRS about $60 for any month in which they do not have health insurance. Someone with an annual income of $100,000 a year would likely owe about $200. The price of a qualifying insurance policy is projected to be around $400 per month. See D. Newman, CRS Report for Congress, Individual Mandate and Related Information Requirements Under PPACA 7, and n. 25 (2011).
If it's based on income isn't it an "income" tax?
Mark Levin, a Constitutional lawyer, already commented on this.
Ah, I see the sun rises and sets by Levin for you so there is no need to even continue this conversation any further.
14 posted on
07/02/2012 10:32:59 AM PDT by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: Meet the New Boss
That's not correct.Have you seen Footnote 8?
So if it's not an income tax as you contend, then in your opinion what kind of tax is it?
15 posted on
07/02/2012 10:37:07 AM PDT by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: philman_36
So because he says the word income several times, its now an income tax. You can quote to death, but that does not make it what you say it is. Its NOT how the tax is calculated as what determines the type of tax, but what triggers it. You can pass a toll tax, but tax differently due to type of car, luxury vs. compact. You could, with your logic, call that an income tax too. But its what TRIGGERS the tax that determines what the tax is, so, in my illustration, its a toll tax. And OBAMACARE, but Robert’s decision, is a poll tax.
16 posted on
07/02/2012 10:40:44 AM PDT by
donjuanluis07
(Just not that $%#ing RINO Romney)
To: philman_36
“If it’s based on income isn’t it an ‘income’ tax?”
It’s not based on income. It’s based on whether or not you own an insurance policy. Income may exclude certain people, and among those who qualify income may determine how much you pay. But only the wilfully blind on that basis will call it an income tax.
No matter what your income, if you are covered by insurance you are not taxed. That makes it a tax on not having insurance. That means it is not an income tax. Income taxes are taxes triggered by certain kinds and amounts of income. This tax is triggered by not being insured. It’s as simple as that.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson