Obamacare tax to hit 50% more – mostly middle class

by NW Spotlight

The Associated Press is reporting that “Nearly 6 million Americans — significantly more than first estimated— will face a tax penalty” under Obamacare, for not getting insurance. AP goes on to note “Most would be in the middle class. The new estimate amounts to an inconvenient fact for the administration, a reminder of what critics see as broken promises.”

The new numbers from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, 6 million, are 50% higher than the 4 million estimated when Obamacare passed. AP notes “in his first campaign for the White House, Obama pledged not to raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year and couples making less than $250,000.”

Another broken Obama promise. More than 80% of the 6 million projected to face the new tax penalty make much less than the incomes in Obama’s campaign pledge to the middle class. The CBO analysis finds nearly 80% of the 6 million make “$55,850 or less for an individual and $115,250 or less for a family of four.”

Justifying the tax penalty on the middle class, a spokeswoman for the Obama administration said “We’re no longer going to subsidize the care of those who can afford to buy insurance but make a choice not to buy it.”

The average tax penalty will be $1,200.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 06:00 | Posted in Health Care Reform, President Obama, Taxes | 35 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Rupert in Springfield

    A lot of things about Obamacare didn’t come in as advertised. But then, a lot of things about Obama didn’t come out as advertised either. Right about now the deficit was supposed to have been cut in half, foreign countries were supposed to respect us, Afghanistan was supposed to have not been lost…. the list goes on and on. More people will get their taxes raised than previously thought? Throw it on the ever growing mountain of crap this guy seems to be able to screw up.

    • DavidAppell

      Under Obama: 3.76 million private sector jobs since July 09.
      4.63 million since Feb 2010.Osama Bin Laden dead.
      The Iraq War finished. $7,000,000,000,000 in wealth created in the stock market.
      The numbers of uninsured dropping in the first time since forever.
      Health insurance premiums smaller than expected.
      Gas prices below the Bush years.
      Smaller government.

      And the problem is where exactly?

      • Judahlevi

        David, your talking points are repetitive and boring. Exactly why are you on this conservative site to begin with? You have zero chance of convincing anyone here that Obama is anything other than the inexperienced and incompetent fool he has turned out to be.

        • DavidAppell

          Judah: I am here to present you with facts.

          Then I like seeing you reveal yourselves by denying them.

          • Judahlevi

            David, even your “facts” are not facts. As we have said, there is very little ‘truth’ in politics. You don’t ‘own’ the truth anymore than anyone else. You own only your opinion.

          • DavidAppell

            Go ahead, Judah — dispute my facts. Bring it on, or shut up.

          • Judahlevi

            “or shut up.”
            The ‘tolerance’ of liberals is actually intolerance. Either agree with them or “shut up.” This is childish.

          • DavidAppell

            It’s not intolerance — it’s simply expecting you not to act like a fool.

            Put up, or (for once) shut up.

          • Judahlevi

            Ah, name-calling now. Another liberal trait which is also childish. No, it is intolerance of the worst kind.

          • DavidAppell

            You have yet to present, or dispute, a single fact.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            Actually you have yet to acknowledge your fact is wrong. Less people working now than when Obama took office.

            The only way you get the jobs created number is by using a lower work force figure.

            Live with it.

          • DavidAppell

            Since Jan 2009 the number of employed has dropped by 86,000, because the number of employees at all level of government has dropped by 676,000. (The latter is acting as a drain on the economy.)

          • valley person

            Facts are not facts? Please explain.

        • ardbeg

          Exactly! why let fact checker screw thing up.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        >Under Obama: 3.76 million private sector jobs since July 09.

        Actually my problem is mostly with people who continue to make the same mistake over and over again.

        First of all, nice try with the cherry picking, Obama became president in January, not July.

        Second of all, there are less people working now than when he took office.

        Could you please try and either remember this point or read up on this matter before making this mistake again? Thanks.

        • DavidAppell

          My problem is with people who look at numbers without looking at what they mean.

          No President can much influence the economy in his first day in office, especially one in utter freefall. In Bush’s last 12 months in office, 4.2 million jobs vanished.

          1.1 million jobs were lost the *month* Bush left office. Just one month.

          And yet Obama staunched this collapse by Dec 2009. Not bad.

          But if that’s the game you want to play, let’s look at both recent Presidents from their first month in office. 0.9 M private sector jobs were lost in Bush’s first term, and a net of 0.3 M were gained in his second. So far Obama has presided over 0.4 M new private sector jobs.

          About your last claim: since Jan 2009, the number of employed has dropped by 86,000. Why? Because the number of employees at all level of government has dropped by 676,000.

          • Myke

            David, your ‘talking’ out of your blow hole.

            Per the US Dept of Labor Statistics 11/8/2013

            The civilian labor force was down by 720,000 in
            October. The labor force participation rate fell by
            0.4 percentage point to 62.8 percent over the month.
            Total employment as measured by the household
            survey fell by 735,000 over the month and the
            employment-population ratio declined by 0.3
            percentage point to 58.3 percent. This employment
            decline partly reflected a decline in federal
            government employment.

            The number of persons employed part time for
            economic reasons (sometimes referred to as
            involuntary part-time workers) was little changed at
            8.1 million in October. These individuals were
            working part time because their hours had been cut
            back or because they were unable to find a full-time

            In regards to your claim of 7 trillion in stock market
            created wealth, there is ample evidence, from a Boston
            University study, Miao, to support the notion that a bubble
            exists, and that the net effect is that the fiscal policies
            of the last five years has enhanced the recession. This is
            supported by American economist Robert Shiller,
            2013 Nobel Prize winner. This bubble is being created
            by the SAME bankers who were blamed for the housing
            bubble that created the ‘Great Recession.’

            I would continue, but I think you get the point.
            Telling ‘others’ to get their facts straight when you
            in fact don’t have yours really blows your credibility. This
            country is being screwed and this President and
            his minions don’t have a clue on what to do about it.

  • valley person

    People only pay the penalty if they choose to not take the subsidies and buy themselves health insurance. Maybe conservatives prefer to have a bunch of health care free riders out there, but the rest of us don’t. Get insurance or pay the penalty.

    • 3H

      I might vote for Obama just to watch their heads explode.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        Trust me, you will vote for Obama.

        • 3H

          You know this because…. you know me so well? You’ve been hiding in my crawl space listening to me talk to my wife? You pulled out your Ouija board and asked the spirits to guide you? Are you prophetic? Clairvoyant?

  • Judahlevi

    Many of us don’t need any more confirmations of Obama’s lack of credibility. They are numerous.
    Forcing every American consumer to buy anything is a first step to a totalitarian government. It is not surprising that liberals consent in lockstep with Obama on this. My experience is that liberals are the opposite of classical liberalism – they are collectivists. They believe in Big Brother government which forces you to do things “for your own good.”

    • 3H

      Keep in mind, when Judah gives his political opinions, no facts are necessary or used.

  • DavidAppell

    Employees of favored employers — most of America — get a massive subsidy for their health insurance costs, averaging $1250/employee/yr.

    Are they all going go give this back in the name of fairness?

    • Judahlevi

      No money should ever be “given back” in the name of “fairness.” Who determines what is fair? Is life fair?

      • DavidAppell

        No, life is not fair. But that doesn’t mean government should not strive to be fair.

        PS: I suspect you are one of these favored employees. Are you prepared to give back your $1250/yr in entitlements?

        • Judahlevi

          The Nazis thought they were being “fair.”

          • DavidAppell

            Going there already? Nearly all Americans are smart enough to understand the difference between “Nazis” and “fair.” Why aren’t you?

          • Judahlevi

            Naturally, David, you missed my point completely. Try again.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            Just as most Americans know what a subsidy is, yet you don’t. So whats your point?

    • Rupert in Springfield

      David – They get no subsidy. The government does not pay the average person.

      Failure to tax something is not a subsidy.

      Just like the failure to not assess a $10,000 annual tax on aspiring science writers does not mean you are getting $10,000 a year in subsidies.

      When you don’t even know what a subsidy is, why in the world should anyone take you seriously?

      this would be one thing if someone was sloppy with their language, but you are a guy trying to be a writer and you make this same erroneous claim day in and day out.

      I have a feeling with this slipshod use of language writing may not be your strong suit.

      • DavidAppell

        Of course the decision not to tax something is a subsidy. Especially since it’s a decision that affects only certain people and not others.

        Didn’t conservatives complain for years about the marriage tax penalty? Yes, they did.

  • Ron A

    Way to report the news everyone else did a week ago.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)