An obviously self-contradictory statement. Of course it is a penalty, otherwise the tax would have been imposed from the outset instead of upon revelation that an individual had not purchased qualifying health care coverage. Roberts was completely in the wrong on this issue. Any Justice that ruled that the Federal Government can force a citizen to purchase something should be removed from the bench.
‘Roberts was completely in the wrong on this issue.’
And he knows he was wrong:
“the Courts job is not to create or alter legislation; that power, at the federal level, belongs to Congress alone.”
Roberts handed them a gift he had no Constitutional right to give.
It may be a ridiculous tax, but it's a tax nonetheless.
This is exactly what Roberts meant when he said that it's not the job of the U.S. Supreme Court to fix a stupid law.
The plaintiffs in that case (various states in the U.S.) would have been much better off challenging a completely different provision of ObamaCare: the authority of the Federal government to define "qualifying health care coverage" and to prohibit insurance companies from selling insurance plans that don't meet those standards.
For that matter ... How many states have even come up with strategies to reduce health care costs by developing insurance models that ignore some of these ridiculous provisions of ObamaCare? Idaho has recently announced that it would consider allowing "non-ACA compliant" plans to be sold in that state. What the hell took them so long to do this?