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

Skip to comments.

IRS Warns Employers: Do Not Try to Avoid ObamaCare Insurance Mandate
CNS News ^ | 1/10/2013 | Matt Cover

Posted on 01/13/2013 5:18:13 AM PST by IbJensen

(CNSNews.com) – The Internal Revenue Service warned employers in a new regulatory proposal not to come up with clever schemes to avoid Obamacare’s employer health insurance mandate.

The IRS said it would soon issue “anti-abuse rules” to discourage employers from taking advantage of any regulatory loopholes.

“The Treasury Department and the IRS are aware of various structures being considered under which employers might use temporary staffing agencies (or other staffing agencies)… to evade application of section 4980H [the employer insurance mandate],” the IRS said in a proposed regulatory announcement issued December 28.

The IRS said it would issue a so-called “anti-abuse rule” in an attempt to prevent employers from using temp agencies to circumvent the mandate, essentially writing into law that even though an employer hires temporary workers and therefore is not technically under the mandate’s jurisdiction, the IRS would fine them anyway for not providing health insurance.

“It is anticipated that the final regulations will contain an anti-abuse rule,” the agency said. “Under that anticipated rule, if an individual performs services as an employee of an employer, and also performs the same or similar services for that employer in the individual’s purported employment at a temporary staffing agency or other staffing agency of which the employer is a client, then all the hours of service are attributed to the employer for purposes of applying section 4980H.”

In other words, if an employer hires someone part-time, then uses an employment agency to bring the same person on for a second part-time shift, the IRS will still hold the employer liable under the ObamaCare mandate.

Similarly, IRS said that if an employer hires the same person for two part-time stints by using two different employment agencies, it will hold either the employer or one of the employment agencies liable for the mandate’s penalties.

The issue stems from the employer health insurance mandate in Obamacare, which requires employers with 50 or more full-time employees to provide government-approved, affordable health insurance to at least 95 percent of their employees (and dependents).

If any of those employees receives government health insurance subsidies, the IRS will fine the employer up to $2,000 per employee, according to a formula outlined by the IRS.

The warning is part of proposed regulations from the IRS outlining how employers must determine whether they meet the 50 full-time-employee threshold and whether the insurance they offer meets government standards.

The IRS said that a full-time employee is one who works an average of 30 hours per week or 130 hours per month, roughly 6 hours of paid service per weekday.

The IRS also said that in order for an employer’s health insurance plan to pass muster with the government, it must be available to 95 percent of employees and cost no more than 9.5 percent of an employee’s wages.

The agency specified that employers could still fall under the mandate if they employ enough part-time workers to equal 50 full-time workers. For example, if an employer has 40 full-time workers and 20 part-time workers, that employer would be considered by the government to have 50 full-time workers and would be subject to the mandate because the 20 part-time workers average to 10 full-time workers – meeting the 50 full-time-worker threshold.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: evilobamaregime; irs; obozocare; taxustodeath
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
1912 quote: "The next thing the federal government will try to do is tax our income."

To build a gigantic, overreaching octopus of a government, larded with bureaucrats, takes a lot of other people's money.

We are witnessing a dictatorial takeover by this administration .

1 posted on 01/13/2013 5:18:30 AM PST by IbJensen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

In other words- what the law actually says is not relevaant to enforcement. Companies will do as IRS bureaucrats decree, regardless of what the law says.


2 posted on 01/13/2013 5:21:20 AM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

Of course.

That’s the new American way.


3 posted on 01/13/2013 5:22:36 AM PST by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

If enough companies don’t comply, the IRS is in trouble.


4 posted on 01/13/2013 5:23:10 AM PST by MulberryDraw (That which cannot be paid, won't be paid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MulberryDraw

Long past time for civil disobedience by the RIGHT!


5 posted on 01/13/2013 5:25:28 AM PST by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

FRICK the IRS. Nothing but mafia thieves.


6 posted on 01/13/2013 5:27:50 AM PST by coon2000 (Give me Liberty or give me death!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

The “gestapo” press begins.


7 posted on 01/13/2013 5:30:30 AM PST by wesagain (The God (Elohim) of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the One True GOD.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
8 posted on 01/13/2013 5:30:59 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Lower your shields. Surrender now. We will add your biological and intellectual substance to the collective. Resistance is futile.


9 posted on 01/13/2013 5:31:42 AM PST by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

The coup of our country and the Supreme Court and Congress do nothing, care not a whit.


10 posted on 01/13/2013 5:32:22 AM PST by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

CUT OFF THE MONEY!!


11 posted on 01/13/2013 5:38:25 AM PST by SatinDoll (NATURAL BORN CITZEN: BORN IN THE USA OF CITIZEN PARENTS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

“It takes a long time to do necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put legislation together to control the people.” Rep. John Dingell (D-MI)


12 posted on 01/13/2013 5:39:22 AM PST by Track9 (hey Kalid.. kalid.. bang you're dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Prepare for yet more layoffs, then!


13 posted on 01/13/2013 5:41:36 AM PST by dinodino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

This probably isn’t going to be popular, but remember that the IRS doesn’t make the rules, they enforce them.

This is apparently an evolving situation (make it up as they go along) such that as they see how various affected groups react, the noose gets tightened. The best hope, imho, is with the states, but I don’t know how much good that will do wrt the Treasury Dept. Does anyone doubt that 0bama is trying to force people out of business via Cloward-Piven?
I wouldn’t be surprised if paying the penalty instead of buying a policy isn’t eliminated or raised before it’s time.
We need to somehow treat this the same way we will treat the 2A. It *will* crash the economy because it will destroy so many vulnerable people, financially.


14 posted on 01/13/2013 5:43:43 AM PST by KGeorge (hoplophobia: n. irrational, morbid fear of guns. A mental disorder coined by Col. Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Track9

BTTT


15 posted on 01/13/2013 5:43:43 AM PST by Earthdweller (Harvard won the election again...so what's the problem.......? Embrace a ruler today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

More good times ahead.


16 posted on 01/13/2013 5:48:51 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

IRS: The law is what we say it is; don’t trouble yourself with what is written in the statute.


17 posted on 01/13/2013 5:52:51 AM PST by Calamari (Pass enough laws and everyone is guilty of something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KGeorge
This probably isn’t going to be popular, but remember that the IRS doesn’t make the rules, they enforce them.

The IRS does make the rules. The Congress makes the laws. If Congress passed a law requiring employees to no fire employees or reduce there hours then there wouldn't be a loophole.

Laws = Congress / Rules = faceless bureaucrat dictators.

18 posted on 01/13/2013 5:53:33 AM PST by Sirius Lee (All that is required for evil to advance is for government to do "something")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Wasn’t this a satire piece just yesterday?


19 posted on 01/13/2013 5:55:25 AM PST by EBH ( The 2nd Amendment exists for times like this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

That is partly disinformation, partly nothing new. Today you cannot tell employees that they are independent contractors to avoid paying social security. This rule is no different; you can’t pretend employees are part time through creative bookkeeping when they are in fact full time. What the new decree from our overlords does not do is prevent the actual workaround that is being used. Wendy’s, Dominoes, and the rest can still limit hours to 29 per week and just hire more employees, as long as they are not hiring the same person through a different agency or to perform two different jobs.


20 posted on 01/13/2013 5:56:44 AM PST by Pollster1 (Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

I wonder what happened to the waivers that 1000+ companies got. I think they were just for a year.


21 posted on 01/13/2013 5:58:12 AM PST by MomwithHope (Buy and read Ameritopia by Mark Levin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Mandate backed by FORCE. Totalitarianism is on the march in the republic.


22 posted on 01/13/2013 6:01:59 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sirius Lee; KGeorge

Yep.

What is really going on here is that the IRS is, on its own, rewriting this piece of unconstitutional sh1t as it sees fit in order to subjugate us even more. Which is as unconstitutional as the original law itself.


23 posted on 01/13/2013 6:02:05 AM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
can still limit hours to 29 per week and just hire more employees, as long as they are not hiring the same person through a different agency or to perform two different jobs.

Re-read the last paragraph.:

The agency specified that employers could still fall under the mandate if they employ enough part-time workers to equal 50 full-time workers. For example, if an employer has 40 full-time workers and 20 part-time workers, that employer would be considered by the government to have 50 full-time workers and would be subject to the mandate because the 20 part-time workers average to 10 full-time workers – meeting the 50 full-time-worker threshold.

24 posted on 01/13/2013 6:07:08 AM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
The agency specified that employers could still fall under the mandate if they employ enough part-time workers to equal 50 full-time workers.

100 part-time = 50 full time so you're still caught.

25 posted on 01/13/2013 6:09:34 AM PST by Calamari (Pass enough laws and everyone is guilty of something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Track9; All

Thanks for that quote from Dingell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqFIb0uVZrs

DEPOPULATE socialists/totalitarians from the body politic.

This thread is evidence of the misery/plunder THEY have created.

“—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”


26 posted on 01/13/2013 6:15:21 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

I would explore the route of subcontractors.

That is , if you are a burger joint, have a counter sales subcontractor. All those on the front line and at the window are employed by XYZ company. Those in production work for DEF company. The only people actually on the company payroll are managers.


27 posted on 01/13/2013 6:17:31 AM PST by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....The fairest Deduction to be reduced is the Standard Deduction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
Photobucket
28 posted on 01/13/2013 6:19:41 AM PST by baddog 219
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sirius Lee

Thank you for clarifying, Sirius. :-) So the Congress would be bureaucrat dictators with whom we are familiar? And of course, *everyone* knows HRH & his jester, Joe.


29 posted on 01/13/2013 6:20:43 AM PST by KGeorge (hoplophobia: n. irrational, morbid fear of guns. A mental disorder coined by Col. Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

:-( What Constitution?


30 posted on 01/13/2013 6:24:20 AM PST by KGeorge (hoplophobia: n. irrational, morbid fear of guns. A mental disorder coined by Col. Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
... if an employer hires someone part-time, then uses an employment agency to bring the same person on for a second part-time shift

That is cheating. If you want the same person there for a complete-hour day, be prepared to pay the price.

The rest of the regulation is government interference, but this one part does require a low-moral decision by the employer.

31 posted on 01/13/2013 6:25:09 AM PST by Bernard (John Kerry as SOS will be the almost-perfect symbol of the Obama administration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Yes it was


32 posted on 01/13/2013 6:25:57 AM PST by Bruce Kurtz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

One of my favorite episodes of Little House on The Prairie, had an episode where a tax assessor was roaming the countryside looking at people’s property, before sending them a tax bill.

I remember Charles Ingalls saying, “I work at a loss for years only to have them take my profits on a good year.”

While waiting in line to contest the assessment, someone in the line says, “Next thing you know they’ll be taxing our incomes.”

Someone else in line responds, “That will never happen.”

Had they but lifted their rifles back then!


33 posted on 01/13/2013 6:27:41 AM PST by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
The agency specified that employers could still fall under the mandate if they employ enough part-time workers to equal 50 full-time workers. For example, if an employer has 40 full-time workers and 20 part-time workers, that employer would be considered by the government to have 50 full-time workers and would be subject to the mandate because the 20 part-time workers average to 10 full-time workers – meeting the 50 full-time-worker threshold.

Interpretation of the IRS rules: Gimmee, gimmee, gimmee.

34 posted on 01/13/2013 6:35:07 AM PST by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bshaw

But wait, Bshaw, that was only a television program.


35 posted on 01/13/2013 6:38:58 AM PST by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: KGeorge
This probably isn’t going to be popular, but remember that the IRS doesn’t make the rules, they enforce them.

Wrong. The IRS made up the rule about the number of temp employees being equal to a number of full time employees based on the total hours worked by all. Made it up out of whole cloth.

That's only one example.

36 posted on 01/13/2013 6:39:37 AM PST by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bert
We are going to wind up with what all socialist and communist countries wind up with - a growing black marked economy. All of us who have played by the rules and have our income all above board and visible, and pay our taxes, will be the suckers, and as all of the new ways to tax us increase, our relative incomes (e.g. buying power) will continuously decrease as those who operate under the IRS radar will ultimately earn more.

I know someone who employs a woman to clean their house, once a week, for 3-4 hours, for $100 (cash, no taxes). This woman doesn't appear to stay always for the full time, has many customers, and cleans multiple houses each day. So, if she cleans an average of 3 houses/day, for 5 days/week, this will earn her ~$1,500/week, without taxes. If she works 47 weeks/year, taking 5wks vacation, she will earn ~$70,500/year with no taxes. To earn that equivalent income, with let's say only 20% taxes would require her to make ~$88,000/year if she were part of the visible economy. Most people making close to $90,000/year probably pay a significant amount more than 20% in taxes, so this woman can earn the purchasing power of someone in a job earning $90,000 or somewhat more per year, while working only 5 days/week and taking 5 weeks vacation.

Yes, I know she probably doesn't always have all of her time slots filled etc., but this type of scenario is not far-fetched. People who cut grass, nannies, house-painters, etc. etc., often have opportunities to get paid ‘under the table’.

37 posted on 01/13/2013 6:40:48 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

Did you miss the other replies?

“That’s only one example.” No doubt.


38 posted on 01/13/2013 6:43:11 AM PST by KGeorge (hoplophobia: n. irrational, morbid fear of guns. A mental disorder coined by Col. Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

” as long as they are not hiring the same person through a different agency or to perform two different jobs.”

Next up? If new citizen Jose works 28 hours at Wendy’s, and has another 28 hour job at Burger King, the IRS will classify Jose as a “full-time” worker, and will force Wendy’s and Booger King to split the cost of new citizen Jose’s insurance.


39 posted on 01/13/2013 6:52:25 AM PST by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
Wendy’s, Dominoes, and the rest can still limit hours to 29 per week and just hire more employees, as long as they are not hiring the same person through a different agency or to perform two different jobs.

A Wendy's can limit an employee to three shifts per week, and if he's a good employee the manager will trade his name to the Dominoes next door, who will hire him for another three shifts, with the Dominoes manager doing the same for Wendy's.

40 posted on 01/13/2013 7:03:42 AM PST by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: KGeorge

I saw, and read, one other reply. What are you referring to?


41 posted on 01/13/2013 7:09:34 AM PST by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
Uh.... I don't think so. Last line in the article.

The agency specified that employers could still fall under the mandate if they employ enough part-time workers to equal 50 full-time workers. For example, if an employer has 40 full-time workers and 20 part-time workers, that employer would be considered by the government to have 50 full-time workers and would be subject to the mandate because the 20 part-time workers average to 10 full-time workers – meeting the 50 full-time-worker threshold.

42 posted on 01/13/2013 7:17:52 AM PST by EBH ( The 2nd Amendment exists for times like this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Bernard

“...but this one part does require a low-moral decision by the employer.”

Please explain that statement, especially as to why it is a “low-moral” decision.


43 posted on 01/13/2013 7:19:07 AM PST by FreedomNotSafety
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
The IRS said it would issue a so-called “anti-abuse rule” in an attempt to prevent employers from using temp agencies to circumvent the mandate, essentially writing into law that even though an employer hires temporary workers and therefore is not technically under the mandate’s jurisdiction, the IRS would fine them anyway for not providing health insurance.

In other words, you will be PUNISHED FOR FOLLOWING THE WORDS OF THE LEGISLATION.

And look: a bureaucracy, an unelected cabal of clowns, is being allowed to create law.

Just like the EPA.

44 posted on 01/13/2013 7:20:15 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dinodino

Bingo. Layoffs will come en masse in low skill jobs.


45 posted on 01/13/2013 7:21:06 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

So, don’t pay the fine and make them get a judgement that can be thrown out.


46 posted on 01/13/2013 7:22:30 AM PST by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....The fairest Deduction to be reduced is the Standard Deduction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

See post by SiriusLee. My reply to them, acknowledging my mistake.
What is it that you need from me?


47 posted on 01/13/2013 7:43:24 AM PST by KGeorge (hoplophobia: n. irrational, morbid fear of guns. A mental disorder coined by Col. Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

The simple way to enrage and make employees and motivate them to throw all liberals out of office is to reduce their pay/salary directly by the Obama cost to the business and have the business pay the coerced “premium” to Obama’s communist Obama Care.

Only then, will the people be so enraged that they will actually rise up in mass and overthrow his government.


48 posted on 01/13/2013 7:55:28 AM PST by DH (Once the tainted finger of government touches anything the rot begins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KGeorge
I wouldn’t be surprised if paying the penalty instead of buying a policy isn’t eliminated or raised before it’s time.

Along with the "50 or more" rule they are already weakening.

It won't be long before every family has add at least one indigent Obama voter to their own personal health plan, in the interest of "fundamental fairness." :)

Growing businesses making the transition from small to medium-sized are a huge headaches for Communist revolutionaries. They give the proletariat subversive ideas about personal success and threaten the profits of the Revolution's large corporatist backers. They must be destroyed.

49 posted on 01/13/2013 7:56:58 AM PST by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: KGeorge
I wouldn’t be surprised if paying the penalty instead of buying a policy isn’t eliminated or raised before it’s time.

Along with the "50 or more" rule they are already weakening.

It won't be long before every family has add at least one indigent Obama voter to their own personal health plan, in the interest of "fundamental fairness." :)

Growing businesses making the transition from small to medium-sized are a huge headaches for Communist revolutionaries. They give the proletariat subversive ideas about personal success and threaten the profits of the Revolution's large corporatist backers. They must be destroyed.

50 posted on 01/13/2013 7:56:58 AM PST by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 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