Feb
15
2015

More Obamacare victims noticing that they’re gonna be on the hook to the IRS.

Bad news for Obamacare advocates:

Between 4.5 million and 7.5 million taxpayers received subsidies for insurance premiums when they signed up for coverage on Obamacare exchanges, federal officials said. These folks had to forecast their 2014 income when they applied. Those who underestimated their earnings either will receive smaller tax refunds or will owe the IRS money.

Some enrollees, however, had a change in circumstances — such as a raise, new job, marriage or baby — during the year that could affect their subsidy level. Obamacare enrollees were supposed to contact their exchange so it could revise their premium. Some people, however, did not know they had to notify the exchange or simply didn’t bother.

Said bad news being, of course, that when these people realize that they have to give back money (around 53%, according to the above link and the Jackson Hewitt company), they are not going to react positively to the Democratic message of You should have known better. Yes, perhaps they should have known better than to vote for Democratic politicians that pushed the policies that are now forcing taxpayers to pay out to the IRS… what, that’s not what the Democrats meant?  Oh, they meant You should have been focused like a laser on every fluctuation in the market and made sure that every element of your life had been processed with the IRS well ahead of time because otherwise it’s your own darn fault that the government can’t keep up with your life choices and maybe you shouldn’t be making quite so many life choices in the first place.

…Yes.  Yes, that will be an awesome Democratic talking point for the 2016 elections.  Keep up the good work!

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: Be sure to savor the bitterness when the Left attempts to lecture us because we have the temerity to LAUGH at their inability to make bigger government work.  “I thought conservatives believed in people making their own choices!”  Yes, Sparky, we do.  The problem is that Obamacare is, at its core, a rejection of the idea that people should be allowed to make their own healthcare choices.  All the drop-down boxes and Choose From This Mandatory List Of Options in the world won’t actually hide that, Democratic chagrin to the contrary.

6 Comments

  • acat says:

    Question, Moe. It looks, to this cat, like rejection and/or mockery based on “one size does *not* fit all” anti-D.C. rhetoric may be a better fit here. Curious why you didn’t go that way…
    .
    Mew

    • Jeff Weimer says:

      Because sometimes the medicine is best taken without a spoonful of sugar.

      • acat says:

        Except that Moe’s postscript seems bent on making the case that Obamacare *is* one-size-fits-all .. without using the language generally associated with same.
        .
        It just hit my inner ear wrong, like someone making an argument for reducing the regulatory impact of Mordor-on-the-Potomac (or Sacramento, if you want to get Californian about it) on small businesses *without* using the term “red tape” … even though “red tape” is hideously out of date at this point.
        .
        I have no particular problem with the stylistic choice, just trying to get educated on why it was made.
        .
        Mew

RSS feed for comments on this post.


Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com