Topic: SCOTUS 2012: The Grand Finale

[Pandora]

Plus, the IRS no longer needs a warrant or a lien to access your bank accounts.

Oh chit....thanks. I can conduct my personal affairs without a checking or savings account, but not my business.

I am not sure, but I believe a C-Corporation is exempt for that edict. Thanks to corporations being people, I don't think they can put a lien on your corporate accounts if the corporation keeps separate books.

I don't know that anyone or anything is exempt.  This is why the IRS is given new taxing authority through the bill and why 16,000 new agents were hired.  "Opt" to pay the penalty instead of an insurance premium and decide not to pay the penalty either?  The IRS has the authority now to just go get it.

Glock is correct; whatever you think may or may not be legal is vaporware; "the Secretary may ....." is written 300+ times in the bill.

[Weisshaupt]

The old saying is when you can't beat 'em, join 'em.  Why bother going to work every day?  Why don't we all just become freeloaders ourselves?  Milk every government program you can.  Claim every conceivable credit, write off, and offset.  Become a burden to the system rather than an enabler.

Anyone been laid off recently?  Don't even bother looking for a job.  Milk that unemployment for every cent you can.  I mean how the hell else are we supposed to reign in this government?  Being the responsible ones has for damn sure accomplished nothing.

That is where we are at.  Galt's Gulch here we come.


I am going to do as Pelosi said, and follow my dream of making macaroni pictures of dear leader and the State will make sure I still have health care and food.  

A number of comments on Zerohedge said the same.  A number of people declared they closed businesses and laid off employees to get under the Obamacare limits today. Others claimed they were leaving the country - that it was time.  Others simply stated they were staying put and going Galt.  Will anyone notice?


[blockquote] "So this is the tale of the castways,
They're here for a long, long time,
They'll have to make the best of things,
It's an uphill climb.

The first mate and the Skipper too,
Will do their very best,
To make the others comfortable,
In the tropic island nest.

No phone, no lights no motor cars,
Not a single luxury,
Like Robinson Crusoe,
As primative as can be. [/blockquote]

[LadyVirginia]

  Did you slap the taste right out of his mouth?

No I wasn't in any condition to say anything--I'd just been admitted to what became a 2 month confinement at the hospital so I was in shock and not saying much.

I did, however, outlast him.  Five weeks in he changed rotations and came in to see me one last time.  He said "I never expected you to "last" this long."  Then he paused and said "I guess there are miracles."

[charlesoakwood]

Weasel Zippers

[Pandora]

  Did you slap the taste right out of his mouth?

No I wasn't in any condition to say anything--I'd just been admitted to what became a 2 month confinement at the hospital so I was in shock and not saying much.

I did, however, outlast him.  Five weeks in he changed rotations and came in to see me one last time.  He said "I never expected you to "last" this long."  Then he paused and said "I guess there are miracles."

The miracle is that you were in such a weakened state you couldn't rise up and smite him, so he lived.

[Pandora]

Plus, the IRS no longer needs a warrant or a lien to access your bank accounts.

Oh chit....thanks. I can conduct my personal affairs without a checking or savings account, but not my business.

I am not sure, but I believe a C-Corporation is exempt for that edict. Thanks to corporations being people, I don't think they can put a lien on your corporate accounts if the corporation keeps separate books.

I don't know that anyone or anything is exempt.  This is why the IRS is given new taxing authority through the bill and why 16,000 new agents were hired.  "Opt" to pay the penalty instead of an insurance premium and decide not to pay the penalty either?  The IRS has the authority now to just go get it.

Glock is correct; whatever you think may or may not be legal is vaporware; "the Secretary may ....." is written 300+ times in the bill.

From Legal Insurrection, August '09, referred to in a post today:

Under both the House and Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee bills released to the public, the Internal Revenue Service will play a key role in monitoring and enforcing health care mandates against individual taxpayers. Yet the introduction of the IRS into the health care system has received scant attention.

The Senate bill imposes a new requirement that all persons who provide health care coverage to others must file a return with the IRS listing the names, addresses, social security numbers, and the coverage period for each person, and “such other information as the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] may prescribe.” (Section 161(b) starting at page 107). The bill does not limit what information the Secretary may request, so it is conceivable and likely that information as to the nature of the coverage, the family members included, and other details will be reported to the IRS.

The House bill contains similar provisions in section 401(b) (at pp. 175-176). The following information must be reported by the person providing health coverage:

    (A) the name, address, and TIN of the primary insured and the name of each other individual obtaining coverage under the policy, (B) the period for which each such individual was provided with the coverage referred to in subsection (a), and (C) such other information as the Secretary may require.

This information is to be provided to the IRS for good reason. The House bill provides for a tax on people who do not have acceptable coverage at “any time” during the tax year. House bill section 401 provides for a new section 59B (at pp. 167-168) of the Internal Revenue Code:

    (a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of—
    (1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
    (2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

The Senate version is similar, although the tax is called a “shared responsibility payment” not a tax. Section 161 (at pp. 103-104) words new section 59B of the IRC to require lack of coverage for a month (subject to certain exemptions) before the tax kicks in, and does not specify a specific percentage, but instead, directs that annually

    the Secretary shall seek to establish the minimum practicable amount that can accomplish the goal of enhancing participation in qualifying coverage (as so defined).

The reporting requirements can only be understood in this tax context. In order to know which taxpayers to tax, the IRS needs to know which taxpayers do not have coverage received from someone else (normally, an employer).

These reporting provisions would allow the IRS to cross-check income tax returns and health coverage filings, and withhold tax refunds or utilize other collection methods for persons who do not have coverage unless they can prove they have acceptable coverage from some other source. This is similar to the cross-checking the IRS does on income reported separately by the person making the payment and the taxpayer receiving the payment. But for the first time the IRS is not checking for income to tax, but for lack of health coverage.

These provisions should have people interested in privacy greatly concerned. While income information already is reported to the IRS, the IRS traditionally has not received personal health care information about individuals.

The IRS involved in health care monitoring and enforcement.

Furthermore, anybody remember a couple months ago, the IRS arrogated to itself the power to confiscate your passport, or render it void, if it was decided you were "in violation"; no lien, no court decision required?

[John Florida]

Plus, the IRS no longer needs a warrant or a lien to access your bank accounts.

Oh chit....thanks. I can conduct my personal affairs without a checking or savings account, but not my business.

I am not sure, but I believe a C-Corporation is exempt for that edict. Thanks to corporations being people, I don't think they can put a lien on your corporate accounts if the corporation keeps separate books.

I don't know that anyone or anything is exempt.  This is why the IRS is given new taxing authority through the bill and why 16,000 new agents were hired.  "Opt" to pay the penalty instead of an insurance premium and decide not to pay the penalty either?  The IRS has the authority now to just go get it.

Glock is correct; whatever you think may or may not be legal is vaporware; "the Secretary may ....." is written 300+ times in the bill.

From Legal Insurrection, August '09, referred to in a post today:

Under both the House and Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee bills released to the public, the Internal Revenue Service will play a key role in monitoring and enforcing health care mandates against individual taxpayers. Yet the introduction of the IRS into the health care system has received scant attention.

The Senate bill imposes a new requirement that all persons who provide health care coverage to others must file a return with the IRS listing the names, addresses, social security numbers, and the coverage period for each person, and “such other information as the Secretary [of Health and Human Services] may prescribe.” (Section 161(b) starting at page 107). The bill does not limit what information the Secretary may request, so it is conceivable and likely that information as to the nature of the coverage, the family members included, and other details will be reported to the IRS.

The House bill contains similar provisions in section 401(b) (at pp. 175-176). The following information must be reported by the person providing health coverage:

    (A) the name, address, and TIN of the primary insured and the name of each other individual obtaining coverage under the policy, (B) the period for which each such individual was provided with the coverage referred to in subsection (a), and (C) such other information as the Secretary may require.

This information is to be provided to the IRS for good reason. The House bill provides for a tax on people who do not have acceptable coverage at “any time” during the tax year. House bill section 401 provides for a new section 59B (at pp. 167-168) of the Internal Revenue Code:

    (a) TAX IMPOSED.—In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of—
    (1) the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
    (2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

The Senate version is similar, although the tax is called a “shared responsibility payment” not a tax. Section 161 (at pp. 103-104) words new section 59B of the IRC to require lack of coverage for a month (subject to certain exemptions) before the tax kicks in, and does not specify a specific percentage, but instead, directs that annually

    the Secretary shall seek to establish the minimum practicable amount that can accomplish the goal of enhancing participation in qualifying coverage (as so defined).

The reporting requirements can only be understood in this tax context. In order to know which taxpayers to tax, the IRS needs to know which taxpayers do not have coverage received from someone else (normally, an employer).

These reporting provisions would allow the IRS to cross-check income tax returns and health coverage filings, and withhold tax refunds or utilize other collection methods for persons who do not have coverage unless they can prove they have acceptable coverage from some other source. This is similar to the cross-checking the IRS does on income reported separately by the person making the payment and the taxpayer receiving the payment. But for the first time the IRS is not checking for income to tax, but for lack of health coverage.

These provisions should have people interested in privacy greatly concerned. While income information already is reported to the IRS, the IRS traditionally has not received personal health care information about individuals.

The IRS involved in health care monitoring and enforcement.

Furthermore, anybody remember a couple months ago, the IRS arrogated to itself the power to confiscate your passport, or render it void, if it was decided you were "in violation"; no lien, no court decision required?

So we're offically prisoners?

[Pandora]

YES!

[charlesoakwood]

Comrade.
                 

[Glock32]

We are not citizens, we are subjects. We exist solely to perform our daily drudgery, so that half or more of our earnings can be taken under threat of physical violence to pay for the very instruments of state which violate our liberties and dignities.  In the process the oligarchs, the plutocrats, live lives of material pleasure just like the high ranking apparatchiks in the USSR.

Next Wednesday this country will go through the motions of celebrating its birth, with flags waving everywhere, pretending we are still anything like a free country.  If you have any respect for what our Founders bequeathed to us, do not participate in the offensive charade of July 4th.  It should be a day of protest.

[Pandora]

I'm so pissed, I'm calm.

Roberts, that sonofabitch, rewrote the law by claiming the mandate was a tax.  That was how Virelli tried to avoid arguing it and that's not how it was written.

Furthermore, his opinion stated it wasn't the job of the Court to protect us from our political decisions and that in itself is a faulty premise -- the job of the Court is to uphold the Constitution, until it's amended -- no matter what the stupid sheeple vote for.  Would he have given the green light to a reimposition of slavery through legislation because it's only his job "to umpire"?

[LadyVirginia]

I just got back from driving through town--car dealerships, a hospital, a restaurant.  It all seemed foreign to me.  And suddenly I understood that tipping point that must have occurred fom my ancestor, John, who came to this country decades before it was the United States as a 21 year old man, leaving his family behind.  He served in the War for Independence and was a leader in his community.  I wondered about that decision to leave all behind and find somewhere new.    

In 1836 on this date James Madison died. (h/t ricochet.com)

[IronDioPriest]

HT: Allah...

...from Romney’s website: “As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.”

[LadyVirginia]

I forgot to add that when I was out I heard a clip from ABC radio news of a woman relieved that her 4 year old who'd already had one kidney transplant won't be denied insurance coverage.

I yelled back at her.  "And every other child that comes after with kidney disease will not get a a transplant!  And if she thinks her daughter is going to get the same level of care she gets now , that mother is living in fantasy land."  

[Predator Don]

We are not citizens, we are subjects. We exist solely to perform our daily drudgery, so that half or more of our earnings can be taken under threat of physical violence to pay for the very instruments of state which violate our liberties and dignities.  In the process the oligarchs, the plutocrats, live lives of material pleasure just like the high ranking apparatchiks in the USSR.

Next Wednesday this country will go through the motions of celebrating its birth, with flags waving everywhere, pretending we are still anything like a free country.  If you have any respect for what our Founders bequeathed to us, do not participate in the offensive charade of July 4th.  It should be a day of protest.

Glock, there will be no celebration in my household......we will be home, offer a prayer for our country and it's subjects.....may we wake from our slumber and find the courage to embrace real change.

[warpmine]

I just got back from driving through town--car dealerships, a hospital, a restaurant.  It all seemed foreign to me.  And suddenly I understood that tipping point that must have occurred fom my ancestor, John, who came to this country decades before it was the United States as a 21 year old man, leaving his family behind.  He served in the War for Independence and was a leader in his community.  I wondered about that decision to leave all behind and find somewhere new.    

In 1836 on this date James Madison died. (h/t ricochet.com)

...and so did the Republic.
Scrap it all start new based on the original constitution plus the bill of rights.

Destroy all socialist animals in the mean time. Happy hunting!

[Pandora]

Unh hunh.  I am vindicated and validated:

It required, as Justice Scalia noted in the dissent, a rewriting of the legislation, and the enactment of a tax via judicial fiat where the legislature knowingly and deliberately had refused to do so.

More of Scalia's dissent at the link,

[LadyVirginia]

we will be home, offer a prayer for our country and it's subjects.....may we wake from our slumber and find the courage to embrace real change.

There's a church having a service near us and a lunch after that we're going to on the 4th.  Plus we will be reading the Declaration of Independence at home sometime in the afternoon.

[Glock32]

Just for the love of God, I implore everyone to forget the usual fireworks and cookouts and what not.  Our Republic is dead.  There is nothing to celebrate, only to mourn.  The thought of an ordinary Fourth of July is incomprehensible.

[LadyVirginia]

Just for the love of God, I implore everyone to forget the usual fireworks and cookouts and what not.  Our Republic is dead.  There is nothing to celebrate, only to mourn.  The thought of an ordinary Fourth of July is incomprehensible.

I will be imploring for God's mercy. Though after 30 + years of abortion we don't deserve it.