Will the IRS be able to seize ones assets if one choose not to get health insurance and not pay the penalty either? Would anybody actually go to jail over this?
I personally think the IRS will be able to have the ability to enforce and collect this tax if it wants to. How the public would react, might be a be more than what they bargained for though, if many of our cash strapped youth and working middle-class started having their assets seized for refusing to pay the tax, and I can only imagine the outcry if they started jailing them.
I thought this article was interesting: It says, normally what happens is simple. Refuse to pay your taxes, the government takes your stuff and all assets you expect to receive in the future. This article is arguing ObamaCare is the possible exception.
It states:
He also says, In contrast, the ObamaCare law says that anyone who does not have health insurance and fails to pay the tax cannot be criminally prosecuted or criminally penalized. There goes the government’s strongest weapon.
Where are you getting this? Has anyone in a position to actually do such a thing a thing said that imprisonment is an option? If not, why do you think it will happen?
Refusal to pay the health insurance tax penalty thingy would just mean underpaying your taxes by the exact amount of the penalty. How is this different from writing a smaller check than needed because you don’t have the money right now? You’d just owe some intest and penalties and if you persisted in your recalcitrance, you’d eventually wind up with your wages garnished or something, right?
My understanding is that we do not current jail anybody for underpaying their federal taxes. Jail time is reserved for those who cheat by filing fraudulently in order to evade taxes. Am I wrong?
Not very enforceable at all. Unless IRS computers can automatically track down people who are cheating the system AND they have a tax return coming to them there’s really no way to get the money. It would be more expensive to prosecute them than any money collected. The law might coerce some law-abiding citizen to pay up, but not all that many.
If you have enouh money/income to qualify to pay the penalty (rather than qualifying for the medicare-type plans) then you have bank accounts and other assets that can be seized to pay overdue taxes, and an income that can be garnisheed; they simply serve the judgement and a garnishee order on your employer and it is deducted off your paycheque.
If you don’t have the assets to pay the penalty tax in bank account or wages, why would you not qualify for heavily subsidized (or free) health care?
I’m not sure how it is going to play out which is why I’m afraid I got more questions than answers. But I’m thinking if one is checking off the box that they have health insurance when they don’t, to avoid the penalty, wouldn’t this be considered a fraudulent act? If so, why couldn’t they put jail time as an option, particularly if they did this year after year, and saved thousands of dollars in penalties? Many self employed wouldn’t be able to have their wages garnished, but I suppose the IRS could seize their bank accounts.
if they’re at all like the Canadian tax system, tax fraud results in you usually paying the missing funds, and then a penalty on top of that equal to the outstanding amount. Lie and pay double.
(Unless you are a former Canadian Prime Minister who neglected to report and pay taxes on income paid to you in brown paper envelopes - then you simply make a deal with the revenue agency to pay half the outstanding amount.)
You’re right that people who don’t file tax returns at all will probably not get hit with the penalty… but those people are also the ones who’d be most likely to get help subsidizing their insurance. The income limits are pretty low.
For those who do file, there will probably be a form to report your insurance status, and insurers will be filing forms with the IRS to report who is covered. There aren’t many details at this stage of the game, though. In fact, the most recent information I know of a request for public comments in Notice 2012-32.
It wouldn’t shock me if the IRS delayed implementation of this portion of the law, as they have with other portions like W-2 reporting of employer-paid premiums.
Hmmm… I remember people saying that the AHCA had no real enforcement powers for those who don’t get insurance like they’re supposed to. Supposedly, in order to get enough votes, enforcement was declawed.
However, that was back when the administration was saying that the mandate was a mandate and not a tax. Then the Supreme Court weighted in and said it can stand, but only as a tax.
In MA we’ve had this law in place for a few years now. We get “Form MA 1099-HC Mass Health Care” with the Insurance company name and their FID number, that you have to submit with your taxes, so you can’t just check a box saying you have health insurance if you don’t. (I don’t know what forms people with Medicare/Medicaid get)
Not me. It seems like the IRS could at least go after your bank accounts if you’ve lied on your tax returns by checking off the box you had health insurance when you didn’t, to avoid the penalty. But in the article he states: “Under ObamaCare, the IRS cannot seize any of your property to enforce the mandate penalty. The IRS cannot go after the money in your bank accounts, and it can’t sell your car. It can’t send you to jail, and it can’t touch your stuff.”
So I decide not to have insurance since I’m so healthy and not pay the tax because Fuck the IRS that’s why. I now discover I have cancer so I apply for Obamacare. Will they check to see if I have been previously covered and to the OP, discovering I wasn’t covered will they hit me up for the back taxes*.
Or better yet, tell me I can’t get Obamacare until I pay the back tax/penalty + interest. Good luck dying fucktart. That’s what you get for cheating the system.