Slammed by Obamacare on Tax Day ...

[Raptor Witness]

Big surprise on tax day for me.

I entered the numbers into my software, and then suddenly my tax bill exploded, when I got to the part about Obamacare, and I paid for my insurance. One of the reasons I like TurboTax is generally they save the good surprises for last.

NOT SO TODAY>>>>

It doesn't seem to be one of the errors in the forms they issued for filing, but likely my income estimate for the first year that I applied. As I recall, I had to guess, based upon my 2013 return, what I would make in 2014, which wasn't easy for me.

I just assumed, that since my premium went down this year, my income estimate was actually high, but apparently not.

What a confusing mess, and one which I'll spend days trying to figure out, I expect.

Am I better off as a result of Obamacare after the first year? The jury is still out on that for a lot of reasons, but the surprise tax bill isn't one of them.

[preacherman76]

Wait till next year.

[Grandpa Greenman]

My last hospital+rehab bill was something like 35,000, I am glad I didn't have to pay all that. Its like driving without insurance, it is all well and good until you have a wreck and you have to pay for it.

[Raptor Witness]

My last hospital+rehab bill was something like 35,000, I am glad I didn't have to pay all that. Its like driving without insurance, it is all well and good until you have a wreck and you have to pay for it.

My biggest complaint about the new legislation, was that I spent days trying to get a simple answer to my question about the marriage penalty under the new program.

Specifically, when one spouse is salary, and the other is self-employed. Nobody could help me project if it would save me money to file separate under Obamacare. Nobody could assure me that the marriage penalty would not change.

It's still not clear to me. I'll have to manually go in and file separate just to see what happens with the numbers.

There should never be a law that no one fully understands, especially the people that are trained to implement it. It runs contrary to every grain of my being.

I work in a very complex field, but I can always answer the questions ask by my customers, or I can find the answers. In the case of the federal government, they can do neither.

It's a dinosaur with a giant body and a tiny little brain, doomed to extinction. Which means we will be doomed as well.

http://youtu.be/dzJyLMiSO58

Edited April 16, 2015 by Raptor Witness

[F3SS]

The more negative effects that this tax/fine/penalty or whatever word made it legal has on society the better the chances of the SCOTUS shooting it down next year. Remember, the only reason they gave it the ok is because they couldn't rule against a tax before first seeing its effects on society. Keep on btchin people!

[aztek]

Specifically, when one spouse is salary, and the other is self-employed. Nobody could help me project if it would save me money to file separate under Obamacare. Nobody could assure me that the marriage penalty would not change.

marrige panalty has noting to do with obamacare, it always existed, what did not, is working spouse surcharge,

[Bama13]

What is the marriage penalty? I know that got re-married because it helped on their taxes.

[aztek]

The marriage penalty in the United States refers to the higher taxes required from some married couples that would not be required by two otherwise identical single people with exactly the same income. Multiple factors are involved, but in general, in the current U.S. system, single-income married couples usually benefit from filing as a married couple because of income splitting, while dual-income married couples are often penalized in comparison. The percentage of couples affected has varied over the years, depending on shifts in tax rates.

[Bama13]

The marriage penalty in the United States refers to the higher taxes required from some married couples that would not be required by two otherwise identical single people with exactly the same income. Multiple factors are involved, but in general, in the current U.S. system, single-income married couples usually benefit from filing as a married couple because of income splitting, while dual-income married couples are often penalized in comparison. The percentage of couples affected has varied over the years, depending on shifts in tax rates.

Ah, got it. Thanks.

[Raptor Witness]

Well, trust me when I say that Obamacare has made the marriage penalty a lot more confusing.

It's not at all clear to me whether the subsidy, for example, is based upon the spouses income who's receiving the insurance, or the total marriage income. They were never able to answer that simple f&);:/45 question.

I'll bet I could call today, and not get an answer to that question after talking to 50 people. I'll bet you an accountant wouldn't be able to say off the top of his head either. It'll probably be another year or two before they'll know.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Raptor Witness

[aztek]

yes tax laws are confusing as sht, and not just for us, for irs as well, they are as clueless as we are. last year alone there was over 500 tax code changes.

[F3SS]

Yet a simple flat tax still sounds unreasonable to some people. I liked when Cruz said his vision is for US to be able to do our taxes on an index card.

[Raptor Witness]

It's still too early to say how good these Affordable Care plans are.

What I'm hearing lately, is that the providers consider commercial insurance far better than Obamacare, despite the fact that the premium I'm paying, coupled with the subsidy is about the same as her commercial insurance plan.

I know this, because I know what my wife's company pays for her insurance. Yet, her plan is vastly favored across the marketplace.

What that means, is the taxpayers may be getting a really crappy deal.

It makes no sense, because the size of the pool should determine the benefit quality vs. the price.

This underlines what I've said before here about this whole set up. It falsely gives the appearance of choice, when there's absolutely no competition whatsoever. That's fraud in my book.

It looks like what they've done in my state, is essentially begged the largest commercial healthcare provider, to provide services to me, while allowing them to provide a lower quality of coverage compared to a similarly priced commercial package.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Raptor Witness

[F3SS]

Gee ya think?

[Raptor Witness]

I'm seeing a huge collision ahead for this Affordable Care Act, especially since it's being partially administered by the Internal Revenue Service through high-powered collection activities.

The simple reason is, I'm already hearing from the preferred providers that the insurance is no good, and they don't want to take it.

Yet, by law I am required to have it. So who is going to handle these complaints? I'm already getting no where with the insurance carrier.

You can't call the IRS these days, everybody knows that.

Once the people find out that the insurance is essentially garbage, yet they're being manhandled to pay it, I think we could see a real revolt, with socialized medicine being the logical conclusion, and remedy.

I wonder if these preferred providers, who are opening their mouths, realize this?

Edited April 17, 2015 by Raptor Witness

[Yamato]

I'm trying to decipher what you're talking about Raptor. You can't be talking about the fines, you have health insurance. So the Obamacare fines going up next year aren't relevant.

It sounds like you're writing off your health insurance on your taxes. If health insurance was high, your income would be lower, and so would your taxes. So if that's the case, complaining about it on April 15th after Turbotax runs the numbers seems like the least likely day of the year you'd do that. Well maybe besides getting your refund check in the mail. Conversely, if your health insurance was low, your income would be high and so would your taxes. Which again is essentially getting a great deal on your health insurance, applying a tax write off to help you out on your taxes, and then complaining about your taxes. Which I think is what's going on here, right? Or are you just making some of this stuff up?

It sounds like you write off your health insurance on your income taxes, you have cheap health insurance, you wound up paying more taxes on a higher adjusted/net income which is what you mean when you say "I just assumed, that since my premium went down this year, my income estimate was actually high, but apparently not." It's "apparently not", because you paid more taxes, is that what you're saying? I think you just assumed wrong, and it's working the way it's supposed to (income and taxes rise and fall together).

It can't still be a "confusing mess" on April 15th either, brother. You gotta be doing your taxes a lot sooner in the year than that, if you want to spend days figuring it out, do that a month before the deadline.

[Yamato]

Yet a simple flat tax still sounds unreasonable to some people. I liked when Cruz said his vision is for US to be able to do our taxes on an index card.

Sounds lovely. He's a wordsmith I'll give him that.

But it doesn't have to be flat to do it on an index card. And just because we make it flat doesn't mean we can do it on an index card, either. Not if Cruz is going to leave all the other bells and whistles and wonderful gumdrop goodies in place that everyone is going to revolt if they lose. It's only talk bro. Pretty talk, but only talk.

[F3SS]

That may be but its a nice little sound bite.

[travelnjones]

yes tax laws are confusing as sht, and not just for us, for irs as well, they are as clueless as we are. last year alone there was over 500 tax code changes.

yeah i wonder who looks at this crap and says yep thats what i was intending? Seriously we need something less wacky!

I moved from California to washington yet work in oregon, I am not smart enough to figure out my own taxes!