Questions for your health care town hall: Sec. 421
posted at 9:35 am on August 7, 2009 by King Banaian
I need to split up the questions on the employer responsibilities today, because it’s just really complicated. In fact, you’ll find one of my questions below very open-ended because I don’t get one of these sections at all. But as you’ll see, it really matters. Please also note, I’ve gone back to Thomas versus the OpenCongress version of the bill, even though the latter is more linkable and has comments on it. It’s just very slow-loading and gripy in non-IE browsers.
If you are self-employed or run a small firm, this is for you. Section 421 controls the credit supposedly provided for small businesses to provide their employees health insurance coverage.
SEC. 421. CREDIT FOR SMALL BUSINESS EMPLOYEE HEALTH COVERAGE EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to business-related credits) is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
`SEC. 45R. SMALL BUSINESS EMPLOYEE HEALTH COVERAGE CREDIT.`(a) In General- For purposes of section 38, in the case of a qualified small employer, the small business employee health coverage credit determined under this section for the taxable year is an amount equal to the applicable percentage of the qualified employee health coverage expenses of such employer for such taxable year.
`(b) Applicable Percentage-
`(1) IN GENERAL- For purposes of this section, the applicable percentage is 50 percent.
`(2) PHASEOUT BASED ON AVERAGE COMPENSATION OF EMPLOYEES- In the case of an employer whose average annual employee compensation for the taxable year exceeds $20,000, the percentage specified in paragraph (1) shall be reduced by a number of percentage points which bears the same ratio to 50 as such excess bears to $20,000.
`(c) Limitations-
`(1) PHASEOUT BASED ON EMPLOYER SIZE- In the case of an employer who employs more than 10 qualified employees during the taxable year, the credit determined under subsection (a) shall be reduced by an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount of such credit (determined without regard to this paragraph and after the application of the other provisions of this section) as–
`(A) the excess of–
`(i) the number of qualified employees employed by the employer during the taxable year, over
`(ii) 10, bears to
`(B) 15.
`(2) CREDIT NOT ALLOWED WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN HIGHLY COMPENSATED EMPLOYEES- No credit shall be allowed under subsection (a) with respect to qualified employee health coverage expenses paid or incurred with respect to any employee for any taxable year if the aggregate compensation paid by the employer to such employee during such taxable year exceeds $80,000.
`(d) Qualified Employee Health Coverage Expenses- For purposes of this section–
`(1) IN GENERAL- The term `qualified employee health coverage expenses’ means, with respect to any employer for any taxable year, the aggregate amount paid or incurred by such employer during such taxable year for coverage of any qualified employee of the employer (including any family coverage which covers such employee) under qualified health coverage.
`(2) QUALIFIED HEALTH COVERAGE- The term `qualified health coverage’ means acceptable coverage (as defined in section 59B(d)) which–
`(A) is provided pursuant to an election under section 4980H(a), and
`(B) satisfies the requirements referred to in section 4980H(c).
`(e) Other Definitions- For purposes of this section–
`(1) QUALIFIED SMALL EMPLOYER- For purposes of this section, the term `qualified small employer’ means any employer for any taxable year if–
`(A) the number of qualified employees employed by such employer during the taxable year does not exceed 25, and
`(B) the average annual employee compensation of such employer for such taxable year does not exceed the sum of the dollar amounts in effect under subsection (b)(2).
`(2) QUALIFIED EMPLOYEE- The term `qualified employee’ means any employee of an employer for any taxable year of the employer if such employee received at least $5,000 of compensation from such employer during such taxable year.
`(3) AVERAGE ANNUAL EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION- The term `average annual employee compensation’ means, with respect to any employer for any taxable year, the average amount of compensation paid by such employer to qualified employees of such employer during such taxable year.
`(4) COMPENSATION- The term `compensation’ has the meaning given such term in section 408(p)(6)(A).
`(5) FAMILY COVERAGE- The term `family coverage’ means any coverage other than self-only coverage.
`(f) Special Rules- For purposes of this section–
`(1) SPECIAL RULE FOR PARTNERSHIPS AND SELF-EMPLOYED- In the case of a partnership (or a trade or business carried on by an individual) which has one or more qualified employees (determined without regard to this paragraph) with respect to whom the election under 4980H(a) applies, each partner (or, in the case of a trade or business carried on by an individual, such individual) shall be treated as an employee.
`(2) AGGREGATION RULE- All persons treated as a single employer under subsection (b), (c), (m), or (o) of section 414 shall be treated as 1 employer.
`(3) DENIAL OF DOUBLE BENEFIT- Any deduction otherwise allowable with respect to amounts paid or incurred for health insurance coverage to which subsection (a) applies shall be reduced by the amount of the credit determined under this section.
Here are my questions:
- What is the tax credit for small businesses? (50% is the right answer, meaning you should be able to get half of your premium payments back in lower taxes.)
- Ask them to define a small business. Then ask your congressperson or senator to explain the phaseout of the credit. I wish I could to tell you what the answer here is, but I’ve read that five times and I still am not sure I understand it.
- What is the limit on wages you can pay to qualify for this credit? I would refer you to the example Keith Hennessey pointed out a few weeks ago. He has two stories, a 50-year-old bachelor who works for a five-person firm and earns $50k/yr, and a couple who are the only employees of a small tourist shop in a beach community earning $90k/yr. Many of you readers may be this kind of person. What happens to your firm, to your family income? In particular for the second family, do they get the 50% credit (which, if I’m not mistaken, Hennessey did not take into account)? If the family had three kids and all were made employees, would they now be exempt (because their income drops below $20k/worker)?
For your assistance, here’s Chapter 38 of the Internal Revenue Code.
I was surprised at first why no good articles on 421 have been done yet, but now I get it. That passage up above is gobbledygook. What you should focus on is the phaseout. It has both a cap based on number of employees and, it appears, on average wages paid. If you run a small law practice or accounting firm, you may be a small business in many other ways but can’t duck the employer mandates in H.R. 3200. Read carefully.
UPDATE (9 pm): Commenter on my blog and my colleague David Switzer explains the phaseout of the credit:
So if you pay your employees $30,000, the excess is $10,000 and the ratio of the excess to $20,000 is 50%. Thus, the government would not cover 25% of the cost of health care (since 25/50 is 50%). So it looks like employers get nothing when they pay above $40,000 — which is right at the median personal income for full-time workers above the age of 25.
So you get a credit only if you hire relatively unskilled labor. I assume this means only full-time employees? I don’t see anything in the definitions in H.R. 3200 that helps.
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
A simple question: How do you insure 47 million new patients, including illegals, with no new doctors and say the costs will go down?
tarpon on August 7, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Sounds about right. Congress is the anti-economy.
BadgerHawk on August 7, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Stop. You’re letting simple economics get in the way of feelings.
BadgerHawk on August 7, 2009 at 9:39 AM
So small businesses should only hire “illegal aliens”?
Tommy_G on August 7, 2009 at 9:39 AM
King,
An SEIU detachment has probably already been dispatched to your office to “answer” your question for you.
forest on August 7, 2009 at 9:40 AM
Looks like there is a whole lot of euthanasia to do.
tarpon on August 7, 2009 at 9:40 AM
You have broken one of left’s cardinal rules . . . you have become an informed citizen and have the gall to question the omnipotent government regime. I’m coming on a little strong perhaps but still accurate.
rplat on August 7, 2009 at 9:43 AM
We small business owners are so TOTALLY SCREWED.
redfoxbluestate on August 7, 2009 at 9:43 AM
This is the 2009 version of the Abbott and Costello “Who’s on First Base” skit.
scullymj on August 7, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Liberal logic, by suspending the law of non-contradiction.
ICBM on August 7, 2009 at 9:44 AM
That’s right, he’s become a mobster because the left made it clear that well-dressed and well-informed Americans simply don’t go to town hall meeting by happenstance.
highhopes on August 7, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Invalid question, there are no new patients. These uninsured people are getting care today that is why you are paying $1100 extra for your health insurance. Or is this another lie?
meci on August 7, 2009 at 9:46 AM
Am I reading this correctly? A highly compensated employee is now one that makes $80k?
pablo5108 on August 7, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Cost isn’t a problem, the government is paying. Big G will pay what it pays and the doctors can suck it up.
The question is: How do you insure 50 million new people and have availability to care increase if you don’t increase facilities and personnel?
TinMan13 on August 7, 2009 at 9:48 AM
Video of black conservative attacked by union thugs..
http://www.breitbart.tv/suspects-arrested-after-racial-assault-on-black-conservative-at-st-louis-town-hall/
katy on August 7, 2009 at 9:49 AM
You got that right. One thing just occurred to me about the thresholds that will likely be in place for small businesses and the effect it will have. For example, if a business earns “over X amount, or has X payroll it will be subject to X taxes or mandates”.
This will lead to more small businesses as we form separate entities for each project or each store or whatever. I’ve already talked to an associate who also has his own business about forming a third entity specifically for a project.
This will be less efficient and it will cost more, and Obama will stand up there and read his telepromter telling him that “thousands of new small businesses were create by ME”.
forest on August 7, 2009 at 9:50 AM
This is completely worthless to print these questions. Our MN Senators are not holding any Town Hall meetings. Have you tried to call their offices? Have you received a date or time or location?
Senator Klobuchar’s office claims that since she will be here in MN and her website is run out of DC, it would be impossible to update her website with her recess schedule.
When asked if the Senator would have Office Hours at the local Minneapolis office, I was told “No the Senator only has ‘office hours’ for constituents in Washington DC. I said “So, I can buy a plane ticket to DC and meet with the Senator to discuss Healthcare?” Response “Well, yes.”
I was also told that I could hear about her schedule on local radio, I said “Great, which radio station would I hear it on?” Response “Well I really can’t tell you or I don’t know.”
Klobuchar is hiding.
mngirl on August 7, 2009 at 9:50 AM
OMG my head is swimming. KBAN good on you for doing this. I can see small business is going to have issues. I wonder what the payroll managers and clerks for larger corps are going to feel like?
upinak on August 7, 2009 at 9:51 AM
This is all great stuff.
I went to the Russ Carnahan event last night well-prepared, with good questions. I’ve read the entire stinkin’ bill. But we were locked out and in our place (50% of the seats) were SEIU goons. So prepare your good questions, but don’t be surprised if your seat at the town hall meeting is given to an Obama union thug.
labwriter on August 7, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Oh, I think HR 3200 is extremely well written. Well written to screw you, that is.
Blake on August 7, 2009 at 9:51 AM
STOP READING THE BILL.
Did you hear the morons in Congress?
You don’t need to know what’s in it – just shut up.
Good Lt on August 7, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Can someone translate this to English, please? So if I employ just myself in my freelance business, I qualify for the full credit provided I earn between $5000 and $20,000, but if I earn more than $20,000, the credit is reduced by a percentage according to how much I earn over $20,000?
Gee, if that’s right, it’s not much incentive for me to work and earn more, is it?
NoLeftTurn on August 7, 2009 at 9:54 AM
Obama threatening Americans for exercising their freedom of speech, when the scam of control of our health system is so incompetent, is unbelevable. These thugs will not stop at anything. There is a chance he will try to use the military against Americans who disagree as he causes this to escalate.
volsense on August 7, 2009 at 9:55 AM
So if a small business paid me $44K last year, they are being given an incentive to cut my pay by more than 10% (below the $40K threshold)?
Gee, thanks.
Sefton on August 7, 2009 at 9:59 AM
I’m just one of the “little people” and I want to know why members of congress, govt employees and other unions are EXEMPT from participating in this wonderful plan I get to participate in. I want to have the same plan they have.
/envy
belad on August 7, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Yet more evidence highlighting the wisdom of our Founders, when they ratified the 10th Amendment.
Government is incompetent for anything other than its explicitly authorized functions.
Government is America’s lowest common denominator.
LimeyGeek on August 7, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Oberstar (my Congressman) isn’t having any townhalls, either. He is having a closed door dinner “for supporters” in St. Paul. St. Paul isn’t even in his district!
AScott on August 7, 2009 at 10:04 AM
I read it the same way you did…$80K is “highly” compensated. According to Obama’s logic, I probably in some way created this mess so I just need to get out of his way.
WashJeff on August 7, 2009 at 10:06 AM
I spent an hour with a doc the other night. His car had broken down and was waiting for a tow truck. As we quided other drivers around his car the conversation, of course, drifted to NHC. He told me he well understood that some type of reform was needed but added that he had trained in England for three years and said Americans will never tolerate that kind of system. I said the NHC was that kind of system. He just said “I know”.
Limerick on August 7, 2009 at 10:06 AM
And the more people the government effects, the lower it gets.
WashJeff on August 7, 2009 at 10:07 AM
ok, i don’t understand & maybe one of you can help me. my husband is “highly paid” state employee of Virginia. the state covers our health insurance–it is great insurance.
the above rule doesn’t affect him, right?
it just affects all our small businessowner friends.
ok, what about this: will my husband have to pay taxes on the $ amount of the health ins. we receive from the state?
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 10:07 AM
They don’t call him the disincentivisor for nothing.
If you’re like me, and opt to be taxed as an s-corp, you pay yourself a reasonable salary which is taxed with income tax and the full 15% “self-employment tax”. additional business profits are taxed with income tax, but only half the 15% SS,FICA,self-employment tax).
Rangel’s last “tax reform” bill would have applied the full 15% tax to all income, but it didn’t get out of committee. I’m looking for that provision to come back in his next tax bill. It’ll be very costly, and they will stand there and say they haven’t raised my taxes.
forest on August 7, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Slapped in the face?
Loxodonta on August 7, 2009 at 10:11 AM
Don’t forget the required abortions, à la China.
OmahaConservative on August 7, 2009 at 10:11 AM
Because shut up.
mchristian on August 7, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Are injuries caused by union thugs and Organizing for America covered?
WashJeff on August 7, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Nope…you’ve become a “non-person” for going against them.
Jeff from WI on August 7, 2009 at 10:16 AM
There will be less Doctors. If you haven’t gone for your yearly check-up with your GP in a while – please go do so. Have a chat with your physician. Dunno if there will be follow through or if it’s just threats but there is an awful lot of talk of “closing up shop”, alternately some are talking to going to a cash-only business.
Oh you’re talking about the “study” by FamiliesUSA the Soros run group, that said something to the effect -you’re paying a hidden tax anyway- or something? Yeah, wonder if that had an agenda?/s/ Maybe we are paying a hidden LAWYER TAX in our health care premiums?
batterup on August 7, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Good article. I find the employer mandate part of this very confusing. It certainly doesn’t help small businesses, which the public option could claim as being a positive.
Thanks for the article.
AnninCA on August 7, 2009 at 10:19 AM
there are more patients. when these illegals find out that they have access to every single health stuff that i have, they will be lined up wall to wall in every doctor’s office.
as it is now, they are sort of nervous around “legals” & come to ERs just for major emergencies.
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Question: “If at present, non-contributing American citizens clog our emergency rooms getting care for nothing and abusing the system, and some illegals shy away from care, using it ONLY IF ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY, for fear of being found out in the system, what will keep them from abusing the system, like the non-contributing Americans do, if the illegals KNOW they’re covered by law?
Non-contributing=sensitive word for leeches
Jeff from WI on August 7, 2009 at 10:21 AM
and i know of several doctors, around 50 years old, who have said “screw it” & either gotten out of the field altogether or are cutting their hours back to just a few days/week. these are the rural doctors where they are most needed, too.
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Slapped in the face?
Loxodonta on August 7, 2009 at 10:11 AM
you know that chick is the wife of Ambulance chaser…Garry Miracle he’s standing next to her while she assaults the the guy who likes his health insurance.
batterup on August 7, 2009 at 10:23 AM
I can’t speak authoritatively on this, but I would be very surprised if government employees would be shafted – ‘look after your own’, and all that.
I would suggest that all government employees that object to the leviathan statist monster, should take a principled stand and move their job as quickly as possible to the private sector.
LimeyGeek on August 7, 2009 at 10:23 AM
jeff: you are pretty damn perceptive.
my husband says “but you are paying for the illegals anyway”. yes–in the ER for a broken leg.
however, that illegal is not going to the dermatologist on my dime; or any other less emergency care.
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Can we get the full text of this turkey?
dogsoldier on August 7, 2009 at 10:25 AM
I need to split up the questions on the employer responsibilities today, because it’s just really complicated.
Translation!
If a fella met a fella in a field of beans could a fella tell a fella what a fella means?
fourdeucer on August 7, 2009 at 10:27 AM
limeygeek: i agree totally with you. but my husband is a judge. not much market for that in private sector. he said it would take 5-10 years to get a private practice back up to where he was before taking the bench.
and we need the health ins. because some crack addict will probably have his cousins shoot up the courthouse one day.
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Seiously that’s poverty level. You can’t afford to pay attention let alone pay a mortgage in Boston at theat level. It has to be tied to cost of living in your zip or it’s just insane.
Alden Pyle on August 7, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Thank you
That illegal WILL be going to all/any doctor a LEGAL American can go to. I don’t understand why people aren’t more outraged at this all by itself. Instead of solving the illegal problem, we’re making it EASIER for them once they’re here.
Jeff from WI on August 7, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Stuffing ovens.
daesleeper on August 7, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Why are you reading? WHY ARE YOU READING? WHO AUTHORIZED YOU TO READ, COMRADE?
mr1216 on August 7, 2009 at 10:41 AM
jeff, i am really outraged at the illegal alien health ins giveaway. why more people aren’t mad, i don’t understand either.
and i would have thought the Susan Komen breast cancer foundation would be all over this bill, too. have you seen or heard anything from them? this bill will defeat everything they’ve done.
and finally, people are just catching on that the bill pays for abortions. no matter your view on that, the govt. shouldn’t pay for it.
but the “euthanasia” aspect of this has caught hold.
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 10:41 AM
That’s funny. I have been hearing now for the last couple of days that “there is no bill.” New Dem meme I suppose?
Brat on August 7, 2009 at 10:42 AM
Should be taken to one of the meetings and the reps should have to explain in plain English EXACTLY what it all means.
hillbilly on August 7, 2009 at 10:43 AM
How do you spend a trillion dollars and claim it’s a cost-saving measure?
hawksruleva on August 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM
How far away are we from this?
Dollayo on August 7, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Here’s the House version of the bill at Thomas:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:
The problem for Dems is that there is no corresponding Senate version and H.R. 3200 isn’t really settled even in the House. But it’s the closest thing to a law under current consideration.
hawksruleva on August 7, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Have you read “Alice in Wonderland”? It’s all in there.
MikeA on August 7, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Ahhhh…the judiciary….fair enough….I was implicitly leaning towards executive branch jobs.
Constitutionally-minded judges are in demand – stay where you are fella!
LimeyGeek on August 7, 2009 at 10:49 AM
They’ve been saying that all along. The reality is that there are something like eight different versions running around but not one bill that is ready for Congress to vote on it. The differences between the versions is pronounced enough (public plan or not, how to bypass the Hyde Amendment, etc) that it bears watching what finally gets to the floor.
highhopes on August 7, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Can’t Virginia judges pack heat?
LimeyGeek on August 7, 2009 at 10:51 AM
THIS IS A MUST SEE, IT SHOULD GET IT’S OWN THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs&feature=related
Jeff from WI on August 7, 2009 at 10:56 AM
So whoever actually wrote that part of the bill just pulled numbers out of their a$$.
kirkill on August 7, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Want to know why? Because a) they have plans that are far superior to the slop they’ll foist on us b) unions gave massive amount of campaign cash to the Dems to protect their interests and c) apparently what’s good for the goose isn’t good for the gander when it comes to socialized medicine
redfoxbluestate on August 7, 2009 at 11:00 AM
We are just around the corner from it.
OmahaConservative on August 7, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Some animals are more equal than others.
Johan Klaus on August 7, 2009 at 11:01 AM
He would be turning over in his grave were such a thing possible.
OmahaConservative on August 7, 2009 at 11:03 AM
But we knew that from the get go right?
One other point here – the bill seems to refer to “average” employee compensation. So if as a self employed CPA, I pay myself $150,000 (which works out to about $20 per hour for the number of hours I work)and I pay three staff people $25,000 each, I get no credit because the average is greater than $20,000? Any one have any thoughts on this?
Ann on August 7, 2009 at 11:04 AM
Economics? No, this is simple physics.
BobMbx on August 7, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Employees, I’ve got good news and bad news. The bad news is I’m cutting your pay so I can get a tax credit on the health insurance plan the company has. The good news is that’s all I’m doing to you today.
MarkT on August 7, 2009 at 11:07 AM
I know.
When things get real bad in this country, I think of him and I’ve got to smile.
Jeff from WI on August 7, 2009 at 11:08 AM
As I’m reading it, if you’re a Sole Prop or Partnership, your salary would not count. If you’re an LLC or S Corp your salary counts.
MarkT on August 7, 2009 at 11:12 AM
This is one A$$ clown that needs the boot and sent home or to White House on assignment as a supporter of the chicago MOB
bluegrass on August 7, 2009 at 11:13 AM
don’t know if Va. judges can carry gun on bench or not. my husband is really, really short so the only part of him you really see when he is sitting up there is his head ((kinda like a turtle) so it will take good shot to get him the first time. he knows to duck.
the dias he sits on is supposed to be bullet proof.
security in the courtroom, you ask? the metal detector in at least one courthouse where he sits is broken.
my husband’s attitude: if they want to get me, they will get me.
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 11:16 AM
I did the math and although I’m not an accountant or anything like that, it seems that the language of the bill is a phase-out from 100% to 0, for incomes $20K (or less) to $80K. That still stinks for any business owner that pays anyone more than $9.90/hr. and never pays overtime.
In the D.Switzer example cited, $30K = 25% reduction; therefore 40K would equal 50% reduction (40K/40K = 100% which equals 50%/50% =100%). 80K equals 100% reduction (zero tax credit: 80K/40K = 200% which equals 100%/100%). The vast bulk of small business employers would be on the hook for over 50% of health care premiums. Mine are $24K/year (family) and had been $30K/year last year, with no preconditions, hospitalizations, or even prescriptions for my healthy small family.
G. Charles on August 7, 2009 at 11:31 AM
And, of course, even for the business owners who pay $9.90 or less, on average [that is, almost no one, since illegals are exempt in all this], they still will have more paperwork and time lost and higher accounting fees if they outsource that.
It is lose, lose, lose, because the quality of care will be going down, the cost of doing business going up, job losses going up coupled with loss of global competativeness, and the cost of healthcare/national debt/taxes are all going up too.
G. Charles on August 7, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Minor correction above: 80K/40K = 200% which equals 100%/50%… (not 100%/100%).
G. Charles on August 7, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Aha!
Reality-based thinking.
Sounds awfully FISHY to me.
PaddyJ on August 7, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Can we get the full text of this turkey?
dogsoldier on August 7, 2009
Also available at rightsoup.com.
SKYFOX on August 7, 2009 at 11:44 AM
I own a small business and can no longer afford to bring in part or temporary full time help, and Obama fraud would make that permanent. Legal folks looking to make a little extra money and young people looking for temporary work around school are getting shafted.
I will not hire under the table, so it’s just another sign of how much harder it is to remain an independent family business in this country. It was the dream this nation was built on, and it is vanishing.
Hening on August 7, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Jeff from WI on August 7, 2009 at 10:31 AM
kelley in virginia on August 7, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Guys – the main point is that the uninsured cost of those in the emergency room was only $56 Billion in 2008. To change the whole system and cost Trillions to save $56B is ObamaCare.
barnone on August 7, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Gee whizz, I didn’t see anything about indexing these amounts to inflation, which means, with this administration’s spending habits, hyper-inflation will put everyone over the exemption limits very soon…..
Coincidence, right?
mredly on August 7, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Thanks Mark, I agree and you just hit another one of my buttons – in this lawsuit happy enviroment, most self employed individuals are S Corps and LLC’s
Ann on August 7, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Here’s another posting of HR 3200 at TheWoodlandsTeaParty.com, clocking in at 1017 pages:
http://www.thewoodlandsteaparty.com/fliers/Healthcare_bill_HR-3200.pdf
And here’s 9+ pages of overview of the bill by the Liberty Counsel (the public-interest religious civil liberties law firm), showing over 100 bullet-point “red flags” in what dogsoldier rightly calls “this turkey”:
http://www.lc.org/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf
You’ll note that Sec. 421 isn’t even mentioned in this overview, in other words when this thing is pored over, it’s likely to get even worse with more and more people finding new sections that they hate.
Please note some of the truly horrible provisions for small-business employers on Page 2 of this overview. Actually your jaw will drop to the floor as you read page after page of the overview and envision the nightmare unfolding.
Edouard on August 7, 2009 at 1:50 PM