Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obamacare’s ‘Cool Calculator,’ Part 2: The ‘Wedding Tax’: You're better off shacking up or divorced
Pajamas Media ^ | 09/25/2013 | Tom Blumber

Posted on 09/25/2013 9:27:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

1 posted on 09/25/2013 9:27:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Here are 59 reasons why hypocrite politicians and unions that support Obamacare want exemptions for themselves
2 posted on 09/25/2013 9:29:10 AM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

wait until the homosexual marriage lobby discovers how many married gays are now 3/5 of a person for tax exemption purposes

welcome to the party, pals!


3 posted on 09/25/2013 9:32:27 AM PDT by silverleaf (Going to war without the French is like going hunting without an accordion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

Marriage has long been a hidden contract, the terms of which you don’t learn until its dissolution.


4 posted on 09/25/2013 9:37:39 AM PDT by donmeaker (Youth is wasted on the young.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So legalizing gay marriage was just a sinister plot to tax them more?/sarc


5 posted on 09/25/2013 9:38:12 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I’m trying to find some details. I’d like to know if the deductible is separate from the out of pocket cap. In WA a family of four making $100,000 a year will have apremium of $876 a month. That's for the Silver plan with a $10,000 deductible.

The way the silver plan details read it looks like a family of 4 will pay for every bit of their HC except catastrophic occurrences.

That would mean eye care, vaccinations, physicals, broken bones and stitches and minor hospitalization like tonsils would all be out of pocket.

The idea of getting a lot of young families to pony up to make this work sounds good if they can afford platinum plans.

What isn’t being considered is that folks raising kids have a lot of expenses such as dental care, braces, glasses and chronic conditions like asthma that really add up and they would get no help in this plan that I can see. I'm not finding all the facts in this foggy plan, but it looks like the bestway to afford cheap HC is to be completely on the dole.

Working families making under $225,000 are going to be hit hard.

6 posted on 09/25/2013 9:42:46 AM PDT by Baynative (Lord, keep your arm around my shoulder and your hand over my mouth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Great post.

If we are hit with the slightest inflation as the FEDS continue to destroy the US dollar to achieve 0bama’s goal of doubling US exports, incomes will go up to keep up with the loss of buying power.

What are the odds that the Gov’t will recalibrate their calculators in a timely manner in order to keep folks from being totally screwed.


7 posted on 09/25/2013 9:50:57 AM PDT by Zeneta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604

Gay marriage is like pot: legalize it and then tax it?


8 posted on 09/25/2013 9:52:22 AM PDT by Tanniker Smith (Rome didn't fall in a day, either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Let’s all remember that the government recognizes your marriage only if you buy a marriage license. If you get married in church and keep it between you and God, the government will still consider you single.


9 posted on 09/25/2013 9:56:29 AM PDT by Driabrin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

We used to have the wedding tax before Bush took it away. Years ago I told my lesbian bookkeeper who wanted to marry her long time girl/boyfriend that if gays could marry they would be subject to the tax.

She said, “Maybe it could be some kind of civil ceremony.” I told her civil doesn’t change anything for straight couples so gays would have to have the same tax.

Bush took away the marriage penalty so as to encourage stronger families. Then lo and behold, no penalty, gays rush to marry.

And now those couples will be subject to Bummer’s marriage tax.


10 posted on 09/25/2013 9:59:37 AM PDT by angry elephant (Endangered species in Seattle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604

It makes for an interesting situation, for sure.

The gay lobby is incredibly powerful. Probably second only to the pro-2nd Amendment one. AND they have the full backing of the press, not the vilification that gun rights lobby experiences.

So we’ll see what happens when gays, still euphoric over their newfound “right” to marry, run smack dab straight into the marriage penalty.


11 posted on 09/25/2013 10:08:34 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The first scenario fits my husband and I to a tee. We cannot possibly survive on the income listed to qualify for a subsidy, but we also cannot afford to pay the exorbitant premiums for Obamacare. So how in the world is this “affordable?”


12 posted on 09/25/2013 10:26:50 AM PDT by Prince of Space (Be Breitbart, baby. LIFB.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Another unmentioned feature?/bug in Owebamacare is the law requires an employer to offer insurance to the employee, but it never mentioned the family of a covered employee.

It also offers a credit on the insurance of that employee that goes to the employer that offers the coverage.

Only those not offered insurance by their employer qualify for the credits in the state exchanges.

Read that last part several times, it’s very important.

Many employers can and will opt to save money by only offering coverage to the employee. The family is left uncovered AND unable to qualify for credits in the exchanges!!!

If say the husband/father is covered at work and earns over about $45,000 a year the family wouldn’t qualify for Medicaid either, because that is based on household income.

The idiot liberals that voted for O’bastard are just starting to find out the truth and they are fuming.


13 posted on 09/25/2013 10:27:51 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tanniker Smith

I guess that’s one way to make sure everyone pays their “fair share”.


14 posted on 09/25/2013 10:30:58 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Actually one of about 59 incentives in benefit programs and the tax code that provide perverse incentives for shacking up over marriage (or encourages long-married senior citizens to divorce on paper).


15 posted on 09/25/2013 10:31:33 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

I saw that that glitch will cause 500,000 children to lose coverage. That number sounds low to me.


16 posted on 09/25/2013 10:34:43 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Baynative
Here are a few of my questions:

If young people are supposedly going to be paying in to prop up this disaster, and they get subsidies if they make below $45K a year, and those who make more than $45K a year have health insurance paid by their employer, how is there any money going toward this ponzi scheme? I realize there is a tax on every single employer paid plan but still, they keep saying young people will buy in. Instead, the government will be subsidizing them.

How will young families be able to afford this? If they are struggling to pay for a home and car, how can they come up with an additional $10K a year or more to pay for health insurance?

So we are back to the government giving insurance to the drug dealers and prostitutes and hippies who don't work and don't qualify for welfare/medicaid because they don't have children living with them. Reparations

17 posted on 09/25/2013 10:37:41 AM PDT by WhyisaTexasgirlinPA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tanniker Smith

Regarding pot: The subsidy calculators add in thousands to your premium if you smoke, I wonder if that is explicitly for tobacco? Smoking pot and other drugs is just as unhealthy or worse.


18 posted on 09/25/2013 10:39:04 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Prince of Space

“We cannot possibly survive on the income listed to qualify for a subsidy, but we also cannot afford to pay the exorbitant premiums for Obamacare. So how in the world is this “affordable?”

Arbeit macht frei...


19 posted on 09/25/2013 10:41:05 AM PDT by varyouga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604

“Regarding pot: The subsidy calculators add in thousands to your premium if you smoke, I wonder if that is explicitly for tobacco? Smoking pot and other drugs is just as unhealthy or worse.”

They also add in thousands for any pre-existing conditions, just like before.

Yep, you would be guaranteed coverage, but you still wouldn’t be able to afford it.


20 posted on 09/25/2013 10:44:05 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

I didn’t know that. I thought tobacco smokers were the only ones being discriminated against.


21 posted on 09/25/2013 10:46:53 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

DH says we should have divorced before our kids went to college — we would have received HUGE breaks on tuition on what we make individually and if one of us had legal custody. Salaries combined, we were hit full force.

We both have private insurance through our employers and have “been assured” (HA) that nothing will change. Neither my insurance nor his now covers the other, as it was before obamacare.

Maybe it IS time to draw up the divorce papers!!


22 posted on 09/25/2013 10:51:24 AM PDT by Bon of Babble (Didn't make it to the gym today. That makes 5 years in a row.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: varyouga

It will only be ‘affordable’ to the 30 million new leeches that will get it free or close to free.

The cost of that will be paid by the middle class that already were covered.

“To the leeches according to their wants/votes, from the middle class according to their inability to hide their income.” - Karl Marx O’bastard.


23 posted on 09/25/2013 10:54:02 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Bon of Babble

We actually had an elderly couple come into our office who had been married for years and years file for divorce because they were better off divorced financially than married. She was devastated and he sat there patting her hand.


24 posted on 09/25/2013 10:56:57 AM PDT by TightyRighty (I enjoy well-mannered frivolity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604

Go to one of the exchange sites and punch in some figures and medical conditions.


25 posted on 09/25/2013 10:59:09 AM PDT by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604
So legalizing gay marriage was just a sinister plot to tax them more?/sarc

Unintended Consequences 'n all that! ROFL!!

In reality, the homo's expected to get all the "benefits" without having to pay the taxes? ROFL!! SUCKERS!!!!!

26 posted on 09/25/2013 10:59:21 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604

“I wonder if that is explicitly for tobacco?”

The Subsidy Calculator only mentions tobacco, not cannabis, DMT or crack.


27 posted on 09/25/2013 11:05:43 AM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TightyRighty
We actually had an elderly couple come into our office who had been married for years and years file for divorce because they were better off divorced financially than married. She was devastated and he sat there patting her hand.

My wife and I talk about this repeatedly: getting divorced but staying together after our sons are grown up and out of the house because we think we'll be better off financially. The reality after we examined it under our circumstances is that it makes no difference tax-wise while we're both alive, and hurts her financially once I'm dead. (Given my health, I expect her to far outlive me.)

Divorcing only works if both the husband and wife are still working and expect to work another 10 years or so, and they combined make more than $65k. In this case, they avoid the following tax penalties:

- Obamacare tax penalty;
- Marriage tax penalty

the above penalties are of course off-set by the husband and wife having fewer tax deductions (one cannot claim the other as a dependent) and having higher income tax withholding from their paychecks. Again depending on their circumstances, each will likely get much of those taxes back at end of year AND qualify for healthcare "subsidies."

Assuming the husband has had higher wages during the course of his life, when he dies the wife will not have the option of taking his social security monthly payment over hers. By law and because they're divorced, she'll automatically be "stuck" with her social security benefit only.

There are also estate issues when the husband dies that should a trust not be setup with her the named beneficiary, the estate would automatically then go into probate with the State getting a chunk of the estates value via probate court costs. This would also put the wife in a bad position in keeping the family home, etc..

In my and my wife's case, I'm the sole breadwinner in the family. Were we to get divorced but "stay together" we'd actually get financially impacted harder than we already are, that is unless she agreed to go on Obamacare and forego alimony in the deal. The only way we "win" in this case is if I have my salary cut down to below $65k -- which financially speaking for me is financial suicide.

My and my wife's only way "out" of paying the Obamacare tax in this case is for me to flat out quit my job and live off my savings until retirement - which I can easily do. Our plan is to sell everything once the kids are done with high school, I'll quit my job and we'll move to a low-tax state where I'll either stay retired, or make just enough to cover our monthly expenses. The side benefit to our plan is that then my two sons would qualify for grants, financial assistance, etc.. to go to college -- which they would not be able to -- should I keep working. I make too much and all these rip-off colleges would charge me full-boat for both of 'em.

Screw that, I'm out to protect myself financially and screw the system in return for all the screwing it's given me my adult working life!

28 posted on 09/25/2013 11:12:28 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: usconservative
If you are the divorced spouse of a worker who dies, you could get benefits just the same as a widow or widower, provided that your marriage lasted 10 years or more.

Benefits paid to you as a surviving divorced spouse who meets the age or disability requirement as a widow or widower won't affect the benefit rates for other survivors getting benefits on the worker's record.

http://www.ssa.gov/survivorplan/ifyou3.htm

29 posted on 09/25/2013 11:41:30 AM PDT by Excellence (All your database are belong to us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604

Why the sarc? It’s perfectly reasonable for a politician to quietly design a tax that will affect a group clamoring for an issue only if that group gets their issue.

Once the group gets what it wants, it is now beholden to the politicians who championed their cause. Those politicians want things in return. Sometimes the contstituents know what that thing is, sometimes they find out later.

I would assume that an actuarial or accountant would have informed the designers of the plan that the more married people the more tax revenue would be receive. If the base is enlarged, the system will be “better” funded.


30 posted on 09/25/2013 11:46:36 AM PDT by cizinec ("Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: grundle

In a country where I don’t have the freedom to buy light bulbs of my choosing, I am free to divorce my wife. We will then get a lower health tax premium, she can also go on welfare and the government will “take care” of her for the rest of her days. I can then (in RI) marry a 16 year old boy to “take care” of me for the rest of my days. And since I don’t really want a boy around we can then have him surgically changed into a female on the public dole. Is this a great country? or what?


31 posted on 09/25/2013 11:56:38 AM PDT by The Public Eye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cizinec

That’s right, for a politician it’s almost always about the money.


32 posted on 09/25/2013 11:56:55 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: The Public Eye

And you can sue any business that doesn’t want to cater your wedding to the 16yo boy.


33 posted on 09/25/2013 11:59:04 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Has anyone on the floor made these specific arguments, or in factual handouts to constituents?


34 posted on 09/25/2013 12:13:34 PM PDT by kenavi (Debunk THIS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
I really can't see that many gays "marrying"...think of pension rights, military pensions in particular, think of divorce,community property,etc...

hell, even heteros aren't "marrying" anymore....

35 posted on 09/25/2013 12:50:55 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
the leeches have been using ER's and clinics and then hospitals for a long time, for free.....the law demands that hospitals treat and take in anyone who comes to the ER.....

so we get a lot of drug addicts who have horrible infections where they use their skin for needle sticks, often having to have expensive intravenous lines placed, and on expensive IV antibiotics for several weeks.....all being paid for by you and me....the hospital does not get paid....

and alcholics....repeat pancreatitis....

all I can say is if you can get off the tax grid, do it....either by retiring or working less.....anything to make your tax burden less....

also.....stay healthy....a lot of things you can take care of at home...flu...colds....sore joints...etc..

36 posted on 09/25/2013 12:57:02 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Excellence
If you are the divorced spouse of a worker who dies, you could get benefits just the same as a widow or widower, provided that your marriage lasted 10 years or more.

I did not know that. Doesn't change our circumstances from a taxable income perspective though as I've been the sole breadwinner all these years now ...

37 posted on 09/25/2013 12:57:13 PM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I remember putting some spreadsheets together when the numbers came out quite awhile ago, and was amazed that the “marginal obamacare and income tax rate” exceeded 100% in these income brackets. How ANYBODY can justify this is amazing.... It is not like a married couple each making 35-40,000 dollars per year are rich, but I guess that they are in obamaville....


38 posted on 09/25/2013 1:16:40 PM PDT by machman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prince of Space

Ask your nearest friendly senator...


39 posted on 09/25/2013 1:37:49 PM PDT by butterdezillion (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

The communist goals have always been to break up families. Families are competition; as long as families are intact and capable of providing for themselves there will be no outcry for government to be their provider.

That’s why the communist-sympathizing organizations are always big on pornography, atheism, sex outside of marriage, abortion, homosexuality, promiscuity, divorce, drugs and alcohol, gambling, etc. Where those things abound, families are hurt and it helps communists create an inverted triangle, where the needy/takers far outnumber the self-sufficient/givers and topple the whole model of families providing for their own, under the burden of families providing for everybody else who blew their chances at a functioning, self-sustaining family because of bad choices.

This isn’t to say that everybody who is in need is in need because of their own bad choices. My sister-in-law is in dire financial need after her husband’s abuse largely due to porn addiction. She didn’t ask for that. But those who push porn succeeded in creating another family which cannot support itself. Obamacare doubly hurts because she can’t find a job.


40 posted on 09/25/2013 1:46:33 PM PDT by butterdezillion (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“If the results presented in this and the previous column aren’t enough to persuade Republicans and conservatives that it’s “now or never” time to defund this madness, what ever will be?”

The author implicitly assumes that the gop cares what happens to “the little people.”


41 posted on 09/25/2013 2:27:01 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Power disintegrates when people withdraw their obedience and support)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

http://pjmedia.com/blog/obamacares-cool-calculator-work-disincentives-like-weve-never-seen-before/


42 posted on 09/25/2013 2:40:44 PM PDT by P.O.E. (Pray for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The thing about this is it kind of compliments a strategy I think conservatives should embrace: boycotting state marriage. Go get married in church and skip the license.


43 posted on 09/25/2013 3:56:21 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Power disintegrates when people withdraw their obedience and support)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

From the documents I received from my employer this week, those exchange health care plans are paid for in after-tax dollars.


44 posted on 09/25/2013 6:48:00 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I have a feeling there are going to be lots of people crying when they see how much they’re going to have to pay. And even more crying when they find out Granny or Momma is going to be sent home to die without pain meds.

We here know this is going to be bad. Most of the idiots in this country have no idea. I really believe this country will be third world status within 5 years.


45 posted on 09/25/2013 7:18:35 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (".....Barrack, and the horse Mohammed rode in on.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Driabrin

If you file your taxes as a single divorced person do you have to include a copy of the divorce decree? I’ve never had to provide one before and I’ve been through 3 divorces.


46 posted on 09/25/2013 7:21:45 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (".....Barrack, and the horse Mohammed rode in on.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

I wonder if this isn’t all going to come to a screeching halt about one week after people start going online.


47 posted on 09/25/2013 7:23:23 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (".....Barrack, and the horse Mohammed rode in on.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: WhyisaTexasgirlinPA

I’d like to see the looks on the obama voters’ faces when they figure out how much their “affordable” insurance is going to cost them. It almost makes me regret having cut off communication with them.


48 posted on 09/25/2013 7:25:41 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (".....Barrack, and the horse Mohammed rode in on.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

Did you mean to say “suckers”?


49 posted on 09/25/2013 7:27:18 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (".....Barrack, and the horse Mohammed rode in on.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

My Wife and I fit that Demographic to a tee.

Go Cruz!


50 posted on 09/25/2013 7:35:03 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (If I wanted a Godless Commie Democrat to run my life, I would have Married one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson