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 previous 1-5051-61 last
To: FreedomNotSafety
“...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.

It's one thing to hire many part-time people in order to comply with regulations, so you rotate many people through employment. It's another thing entirely, at least to me, to bring the same person back in under another payroll in order to avoid the tax. If that person is that good an employee and you are willing to play that game, as an employer you are not a good person.

Maybe if I used the expression "low-rent" instead of "low morals" it would have been easier to understand my intent?

51 posted on 01/13/2013 7:57:50 AM PST by Bernard (John Kerry as SOS will be the almost-perfect symbol of the Obama administration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Wyatt’s Torch.


52 posted on 01/13/2013 8:16:33 AM PST by Flick Lives (We're going to be just like the old Soviet Union, but with free cell phones!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bert

I am in the IT field as a contractor.

The IRS is already looking at us to make us employees because the companies that contract with us have to much control over the when, what, where, and how of the job.


53 posted on 01/13/2013 8:38:55 AM PST by cableguymn (The founding fathers would be shooting by now..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Extortion-Care. This is all about the failed bailout of 2008, thus now attempting Collateral Transformation to secure U.S. downgraded debt, and bailout favored “insurance” companies, which are really “insurance-banking” investment firms.

All on everyone else but the “Exempt Ones.”


54 posted on 01/13/2013 8:40:49 AM PST by Varsity Flight (Extortion-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
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.

Just make sure to stick to cash, as in paper and little pieces of metal.

IRS to track credit card and debit card purchases
55 posted on 01/13/2013 8:45:03 AM PST by LostInBayport (When there are more people riding in the cart than there are pulling it, the cart stops moving...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Obama’s IRS attack dogs are baring their teeth.


56 posted on 01/13/2013 9:45:14 AM PST by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: All armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hattie

They care. they all think that if they cooperate they will part of the new Nomenklatura.


57 posted on 01/13/2013 10:09:53 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 10 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

Employers don’t want to pay for health insurance.

In the end, the government will take over a la single payer.

ObamaCare was never intended as anything more than a rest stop enroute to the final destination - government-run health care.


58 posted on 01/13/2013 10:28:54 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: KGeorge

Clarity.


59 posted on 01/13/2013 10:36:39 AM PST by savedbygrace (But God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Bernard

So trying to avoid a tax is low-moral or low-rent? An employee can be held in high regard but it does not follow that high regard will justify paying the employee more. Pay is typically based on the amount of profit an employee helps produce. A tax is simply an added cost that an employee will have to cover in their worth to an employer.

As to trying to get around this idiotic tax on employment by structing one job into two different employers, it may be better for the employee than having to work at two different places.

If the customer will not buy said company’s products because the price is too high than the employee is not needed. But if the price can be lowered by structuring the one job into two and thereby avoiding a tax, the price can be lowered and the job retained.


60 posted on 01/13/2013 10:38:33 AM PST by FreedomNotSafety
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves

I’m sad to say that I can’t disagree with something like that happening. At this point, all bets are off. (I expect the 3rd Amendment to be violated not by quartering soldiers, but illegal aliens. We would be “sponsors” & it would called “our civic duty”.)

Yep. I don’t understand why more people are not clamoring for secession. It will be virtually impossible to reverse the damage 0bama & the democrats have done for the past 5 years.


61 posted on 01/13/2013 10:31:23 PM PST by KGeorge (hoplophobia: n. irrational, morbid fear of guns. A mental disorder coined by Col. Jeff Cooper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]


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