McCain to tax our health benefits?

[wiffleball 4,790]

The same can be said about Obama's plan.

 

That's why both "plans" suck.

 

Um, I don't think so? I believe employers who DON'T provide coverage actually are forced to pay into the system anyway.

 

In this regard, the plans are both categorically different.

 

McCain's stated objective is to get individuals to buy their own premiums (thus losing the pooling power of corporations)

 

 

BoMamma's goal is to either get employers to provide health care or encourage them to keep providing it.

 

In that sense alone, I'm for BO's plan. The whole concept of pooling power is fundamental. That's why corporations can offer better benefit plans than you can buy on your own. Hell, that's why Wal-Mart does better than the local shop. - Higher volume = lower prices.

[heavy-set 39]

But you only come out of pocket (dependent on your state) roughly about 35 percent of the 2900. 2900*.35 = $1015. 1015-2500 = you come out ahead by 1485.00.

i screwed up the whole credit vs. deduction thingy

[itsbigmoni 1]

yea, you right. but i never read your post

there is a difference between a tax CREDIT and DEDUCTION. I am getting 2500 off my tax bill not a 2500 deduction from my income.

BIG DIFFERENCE. but i now pay tax on my employe rbenefits. $2900 X 15% bracket (i poor). 435 more in taxes but i get a free 2500, whoo hooooo

 

so i would make out like a bandit :bandit:

no way it works that way,right?

 

Yea it works that way. It helps broke people with no employer health coverage the most from my understanding. I don't get health coverage through an employer. I pay $90/month. With mccains plan i could afford a plan costing $210/month and not pay a single dime. I'd get a plan that is theoretically twice as good and save $90.

[heavy-set 39]

Mccain in 08

[wiffleball 4,790]

Yea it works that way. It helps broke people with no employer health coverage the most from my understanding. I don't get health coverage through an employer. I pay $90/month. With mccains plan i could afford a plan costing $210/month and not pay a single dime. I'd get a plan that is theoretically twice as good and save $90.

 

 

So he's going to increase my withholding taxes, take the money he takes from me and give it to you.

 

 

- But say "spread the wealth around" at a McCain rally and they scream bloody murder.

 

 

And they wonder why we think they're stupid.

[pimptastic69 0]

Um, I don't think so? I believe employers who DON'T provide coverage actually are forced to pay into the system anyway.

 

In this regard, the plans are both categorically different.

 

McCain's stated objective is to get individuals to buy their own premiums (thus losing the pooling power of corporations)

BoMamma's goal is to either get employers to provide health care or encourage them to keep providing it.

 

In that sense alone, I'm for BO's plan. The whole concept of pooling power is fundamental. That's why corporations can offer better benefit plans than you can buy on your own. Hell, that's why Wal-Mart does better than the local shop. - Higher volume = lower prices.

 

When McCain asked Obama what the penalty was for not insuring employees, he said Zero. If that is the case, why would they continue paying for health care?

[Isotopes 1]

When McCain asked Obama what the penalty was for not insuring employees, he said Zero. If that is the case, why would they continue paying for health care?

 

What is the penalty for not providing healthcare right now? If there is no penalty, why do they provide it?

[wiffleball 4,790]

When McCain asked Obama what the penalty was for not insuring employees, he said Zero. If that is the case, why would they continue paying for health care?

 

I'm not sure. Sounds to me like he was wordsmithing. This article just came out yesterday:

 

Obama's approach is very different. The Democrat would require larger companies to provide "meaningful coverage" for their staffs under a "pay or play" system. If they don't provide insurance, they would have to subsidize the cost of a national plan.

 

Small businesses, which would be exempt from this provision, would receive a new refundable tax credit of up to 50% of the premiums paid on behalf of their employees. They could also join a new National Health Insurance Exchange, which Obama envisions would provide public and private plans to individuals and small employers.

 

This could entice smaller employers to provide coverage, said Jennifer Tolbert, principal policy analyst at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

 

Currently, only 49% of small businesses provide health care coverage, down from 57% in 2000, according to the Commonwealth Fund.

 

Workers who already have health insurance at their jobs won't see much of a change,

Good Balanced ARticle.

[wiffleball 4,790]

What is the penalty for not providing healthcare right now? If there is no penalty, why do they provide it?

 

 

1) There is a tax deduction.

 

2) They do it mostly as non-cash compensation. It was great way to attract employees back in the day, but now it's killing them. If other companies start dropping it, employers would be more likely to do so as well. They're already slashing and burning on it now. Seems like every year, my plan gets worse and my deduction gets higher.

[pimptastic69 0]

What is the penalty for not providing healthcare right now? If there is no penalty, why do they provide it?

 

It's a benefit of working for the company. My company has crappy health insurance (small business). My wife's company's plan kicks ass. It's one of the reasons every one in Cinci wants to work for them.

 

We've shifted from "Hey, come work for me and I'll help pay for your health insurance" to "If you don't pay for your employees' health insurance you're breaking the law."

[wiffleball 4,790]

We've shifted from "Hey, come work for me and I'll help pay for your health insurance" to "If you don't pay for your employees' health insurance you're breaking the law."

 

I don't think it's quite that severe, but I do like the idea of equality. Some jerkoff who'd rather have a 2nd vacation home than help his employees with health insurance gets off scott-free under McCain, but at least under BO, if he goes that route, he pays in.

 

McCain: Takes my money - regardless - to give to the uninsured - whether they're working or not.

 

BO: Takes employer's money only if employer isn't providing health care to his people. Do the right thing for your people? Pay nothing in - and get a tax deduction.

 

Just my opinion, but I like the second choice better.

[itsbigmoni 1]

The main thing i don't get about mccains plan is to tax us, but then give us the money right back. Hey, i'm gonna tax your benefits, but then i'm gonna give you more than enough cash to pay for the increased taxes. How does that make sense. I'll have to read those links you provided wiff.

[wiffleball 4,790]

The main thing i don't get about mccains plan is to tax us, but then give us the money right back. Hey, i'm gonna tax your benefits, but then i'm gonna give you more than enough cash to pay for the increased taxes. How does that make sense. I'll have to read those links you provided wiff.

 

yeah, it seems pretty crazy. But the thig is: He DOESN'T give us the money back. That's what sucks. EVERY SINGLE DIME of your "credit" goes into a "portable health care spending account" with the insurance companies.

 

That's basically a 15-20% increase in cash for these guys. You don't get interest on that account. You can't use YOUR money for anything BUT that. Do you have any idea what a HUGE windfall that is for these insurance companies? I mean, we're talking hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars in additional revenue each year. - Taken from you, given to them - whether you need health care or not.

 

But he's against "socialism". - Unless its for big companies.

[KSB2424 3,148]

yeah, it seems pretty crazy. But the thig is: He DOESN'T give us the money back. That's what sucks. EVERY SINGLE DIME of your "credit" goes into a "portable health care spending account" with the insurance companies.

 

That's basically a 15-20% increase in cash for these guys. You don't get interest on that account. You can't use YOUR money for anything BUT that. Do you have any idea what a HUGE windfall that is for these insurance companies? I mean, we're talking hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars in additional revenue each year. - Taken from you, given to them - whether you need health care or not.

 

But he's against "socialism". - Unless its for big companies.

Can you put a disclaimer at the beginning of your posts from now on that states:

 

*I don't fully understand the topic I am talking about as of yet, however this is the rash conclusion that I have condured up.

[wiffleball 4,790]

Can you put a disclaimer at the beginning of your posts from now on that states:

 

*I don't fully understand the topic I am talking about as of yet, however this is the rash conclusion that I have condured up.

 

If you're going to post something like that, don't look focking ignorant by NOT explaining what I've stated that's incorrect.

 

1) Is the credit NOT going directly to the providers? Per the McCain site, going directly there. Into a "Portable Health Savings Account."

 

2) Is McCain taxing only those getting benefits and distributing this credit to everyone? Per the McCain site, this is exactly what's happening.

 

So, which part of that is incorrect??

[wiffleball 4,790]

1) Is the credit NOT going directly to the providers? Per the McCain site, going directly there. Into a "Portable Health Savings Account."

 

2) Is McCain taxing only those getting benefits and distributing this credit to everyone? Per the McCain site, this is exactly what's happening.

 

So, which part of that is incorrect??

 

I'm waiting Moose. It's two simple yes or no questions.

[wiffleball 4,790]

"The credit goes to the insurance company that the families choose to get coverage from." JohnMcCain.com

 

If the credit's only going to the insurance company, how exactly does the extra (assuming there is any 12K>5K) somehow end up in our pockets?

Not sure John's answered that one. Sure haven't seen anything on the website other than "The credit goes to the insurance company that the families choose to get coverage from." in terms of distribution.

 

So, KSB?? Educate me please.

 

Then tell me why it is the government has a right to tell me what I can do with my money. You increase my taxes. Then give it back to me, but only allow it to be placed into a "portable health savings account?" Fock you. What If I want to take that money and invest it in the economy? The stock market? This may be the FIRST tax credit that 1) Doesn't go to the individual and 2) The individual has no control over his own refunded moneys.

[wiffleball 4,790]

Huh, I guess KSB has no answer...

 

 

Can't believe McSame's been doing this Joe the Plumber "Socialism" schtick. I wonder if dumbshiit joe know that's john's going to tax him on income he doesn't even receive - then give it to people who don't even work. Sure sounds like "socialism" to me. And I sure hope Joe doesn't have kids, cause a $5,000 credit for $12,000 insurance is gonna be the suck. And God forbid Joe or his kids have a pre-existing condition. But at least he'll be able to use that credit (financed by taking his own money from him) for anything he wants, right? Oh, wait - no. Even though it's his money, it can only be used on a "portable health care account" - apparently held by his insurance comany?? - HUGE boon to the insurance company. That should put about half a trillion of american's tax dollars into the bank accounts of big insurance companies. Completely sucks for him though.

[parrot 789]

Also, McCain says you won't have to pay FICA on it, but if your employer decides to use this as an excuse to stop providing insurance and instead just pays you the money - hello FICA.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Taxing health care benefits is the single dumbest idea I have ever heard from a major Presidential contender. Who the hell came up with that plan, and why did his political advisors ever okay it?

[wiffleball 4,790]

Taxing health care benefits is the single dumbest idea I have ever heard from a major Presidential contender. Who the hell came up with that plan, and why did his political advisors ever okay it?

 

Seriously, I feel like an idiot for not having known this, but if you read McCain's site, it pretty much says nothing about it. I can see why.

 

"Let me get this straight, my gross take home pay isn't going to get any bigger. But you're going to take out taxes on money I never GET??"

 

And then you're going to give it to people who don't even have JOBS??

 

Try to expain that one to Joe the Plumber.

 

 

 

Fock You.

[KSB2424 3,148]

Huh, I guess KSB has no answer...

I just saw this thread again. Geez dood. I don't live on this website, when about 4:30pm est rolls around I am gone. Sorry I missed it.

 

What I was referring to is that your first post you admitted to just now seeing McCains health plan. Then an hour later you are stating, in a fact type response, how insurance companies are gonna make hundreds of billions of dollars now and the plan is a scam. It was like a damn Lamborgini. You went from Zero to Sixty in like 3.4 seconds.

 

My suggestion is that you learn all aspects of a plan and then make a decision. Not learn small bits and then put the other pieces together yourself by guessing at things. HTH

[wiffleball 4,790]

This is the thing that really frustrates me with Obama. I guess I respect him for not stooping to McCAin/Palins' level, but damn man, this is a home run.

 

 

He's sort of aluded to it in the debate, but honest to God, if he just took 5 minutes to explain this to people the way I have, - and say something at the end like "And he's calling ME a Socialist?"

 

 

Game focking over. I'll guarantee you that half the people voting for McCain don't even know that this is what he's proposing. Now way. There's no way in hell if you told them, John's going to tax you on income you never received and give it to non-workers that they'd be embracing all this "Socialist"and "Spread the wealth" bullshiit.

 

If John has it his way, the first paycheck you get after he takes office, your take home pay goes down and your taxes go up - regardless of income level.

 

 

Just say that. Just SAY that.

 

And see what happens.

[KSB2424 3,148]

This is the thing that really frustrates me with Obama. I guess I respect him for not stooping to McCAin/Palins' level, but damn man, this is a home run.

He's sort of aluded to it in the debate, but honest to God, if he just took 5 minutes to explain this to people the way I have, - and say something at the end like "And he's calling ME a Socialist?"

Game focking over. I'll guarantee you that half the people voting for McCain don't even know that this is what he's proposing. Now way. There's no way in hell if you told them, John's going to tax you on income you never received and give it to non-workers that they'd be embracing all this "Socialist"and "Spread the wealth" bullshiit.

 

If John has it his way, the first paycheck you get after he takes office, your take home pay goes down and your taxes go up - regardless of income level.

Just say that. Just SAY that.

 

And see what happens.

See, but that is not the purpose of the tax credit. The purpose, in theory at least, is that this tax credit will create a much more "free market" for everyone to aquire health insurance either with their company or not. It is based on a very capitalisic (not socialistic) premise that a more free market will drive down costs for everyone.

 

What remains to be seen is if the theory will actually work in that environment.

[wiffleball 4,790]

See, but that is not the purpose of the tax credit. The purpose, in theory at least, is that this tax credit will create a much more "free market" for everyone to aquire health insurance either with their company or not. It is based on a very capitalisic (not socialistic) premise that a more free market will drive down costs for everyone.

 

What remains to be seen is if the theory will actually work in that environment.

 

Just common-sensing it, right now, there are a lot of people who buy insurance - who can't get it from their employer. Consistently they pay more and get less. Why? Because they don't have the purchasing power of even a mid-size company that can offer an insurance company a guaranteed 200+ person package.

 

It's no different than Wal-Mart, they buy in bulk and get lower prices than individual mom and pops. That's capitalism too. And it works. Taxing people on income they don't receive, giving it to insurance companies and telling families they have 5 grand for $12,000 health care ain't gonna help people. Man, that just seems like a bad idea.

 

Anyway, that's my thought. It's the one thing that really strikes me out of all this noise. Taxing peope on income they don't receive?

 

Well fock, even the communists didn't do that.

[parrot 789]

See, but that is not the purpose of the tax credit. The purpose, in theory at least, is that this tax credit will create a much more "free market" for everyone to aquire health insurance either with their company or not. It is based on a very capitalisic (not socialistic) premise that a more free market will drive down costs for everyone.

 

It's a terrible focking theory, a government subsidized market is not a free market, and these subsidies will do what subsidies always do, drive the price up.

 

If they want to take away the advantages people get through employer offered plans to create a more level playing field, they should just sack up and do it and forget all the tax credit bullsh!t.

[nobody 2,690]

I like factcheck. That's a salient point. But the point is, it's a "credit" right, not an outright deduction. So, if you don't have $5,000 in taxes at the end of the year to offset, most credits don't let you go below zero taxable income. - That's the catch. And folks like my bartender / dry cleaner? No way.

 

I mean, if he just flat out gave everybody 5,000, that's one thing. But this is not only limited to what I said above (tax offsets), but to whatever's taken out of your paycheck though the year in increased taxes. So basically, it's nothing more than a shell game? Us loaning $5,000 (or whatever) to John so he can give it back to us in one big lump sum? Either way, he's radically increasing the taxable base - on cash I don't get. I think I'd much rather NOT loan the goverment the money every two weeks and then hope to god I have the necessary offsets at the end of the year.

 

Do I have this straight??

 

 

All the political stuff aside, a credit is always better than a deduction. A 5000 deduction doesn't equate to 5k less in taxes. A tax credit does. If you aren't paying 5K in taxes, then you probably don't have health benefits anyway, so you aren't getting taxed for your benefits. And if you are hung up on "loaning" money to the government, claim an extra dependent on your W4.

[itsbigmoni 1]

All the political stuff aside, a credit is always better than a deduction. A 5000 deduction doesn't equate to 5k less in taxes. A tax credit does. If you aren't paying 5K in taxes, then you probably don't have health benefits anyway, so you aren't getting taxed for your benefits. And if you are hung up on "loaning" money to the government, claim an extra dependent on your W4.

 

Its a refundable tax credit, so you don't need to pay at least 5k in taxes to receive it. All i know is if he wins, i'm gonna get a better plan. I'll be able to afford a plan tahts $208/month compared to what i pay right now which is only 90. Better plan plus save over a hundred dollars? Winnah. But that makes you guys losers in the game.

 

I think wiff is exaggerating a bit on that one point. He wont be spending as much money per month because of the tax credit. So while he'll get taxed slightly more, he'll save more money on monthly bills. Unless, he's not paying any montly dues for his healthcare. Then thats the suck.

[nobody 2,690]

Its a refundable tax credit, so you don't need to pay at least 5k in taxes to receive it. All i know is if he wins, i'm gonna get a better plan. I'll be able to afford a plan tahts $208/month compared to what i pay right now which is only 90. Better plan plus save over a hundred dollars? Winnah. But that makes you guys losers in the game.

 

I think wiff is exaggerating a bit on that one point. He wont be spending as much money per month because of the tax credit. So while he'll get taxed slightly more, he'll save more money on monthly bills. Unless, he's not paying any montly dues for his healthcare. Then thats the suck.

 

 

The thing is he doesn't have to pay any taxes monthly if it eats at him so much. Just tell your employer that you don't want any taxes withheld from your check and then pay the 15k you owe in April. That way you don't have to loan the government ###### and you can earn your 2% in your money market account.

[itsbigmoni 1]

The thing is he doesn't have to pay any taxes monthly if it eats at him so much. Just tell your employer that you don't want any taxes withheld from your check and then pay the 15k you owe in April. That way you don't have to loan the government ###### and you can earn your 2% in your money market account.

 

I never knew you could do that. Is that what you do? Is it worth it?

[swamp dog 0]

mccain doesn't have a focking clue when it comes to the economy, nor does he have a focking clue who the middle class or what they do.

[nobody 2,690]

I never knew you could do that. Is that what you do? Is it worth it?

 

 

I don't do it because I don't want to trust myself to save the money all year, but I know for a fact you can do it.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I don't do it because I don't want to trust myself to save the money all year, but I know for a fact you can do it.

I believe that you have to have a life changing event in order to have that sort of a deficit in what you owe the government. You can possibly get away with it for one year, but that is it.

[pimptastic69 0]

Is there a difference between a "tax credit" and a "refundable tax credit"?

 

Also, I know people that are flat broke, but get massive tax return checks (in the neigborhood of $6000-$10000.) They say it's because of tax credits.

 

What's the deal here?

[itsbigmoni 1]

Refundable means you get it regardless of how much in taxes you paid.

 

Regular tax credit means you only get it if you paid that much in taxes to get it.

 

Take a 5k tax credit for someone who paid 2k in federal income tax.

 

Refundable - you get 5k

 

Regular - You get 2k

[parrot 789]

I don't do it because I don't want to trust myself to save the money all year, but I know for a fact you can do it.

 

You can do it, but the government expects you to pay as you go and if your ending liablility exceeds some threshhold I think retroactive interest and penalties kick in.