Caterpiller, John Deere, 3M, AK Steel, AT&T...

[RocketMan]

It may have been a Star Trek reference, but it had its roots in "1984".

[alex_trebek]

I always imagined room 101 as being worse than the cardassian torture room. I would agree that much of the psychological attacks were similar, and it featured some doublespeak.

I always imagined that it resembled the "less savage" communist prison. Lots of psych damage, mild physical harm, and full dehumanization.

[sanglant]

found it , you know the actor(John Hurt?) has obama's ears.

[RocketMan]

found it , you know the actor(John Hurt?) has obama's ears.

Encore has been running 1984 a lot lately.  I watched it again last month.  Chilling.

[Northwoods]

Boeing has announced a $150mil charge.
IIRC Verizon announced a $950mil charge.

[TechMan]

Kroger - Fiscal 2010 $1.5-2.0 Million

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100405/BIZ01/4060308/1055/NEWS/Kroger++Health+reform+triggers+tax+charge

In a filing Monday with the Securities and Exchange Commission, downtown-based Kroger said "most of Kroger's retired employees to not receive a prescription drug benefit from the company" Most Kroger workers are covered by union contracts and receive presents drug coverage through multi-employers plans to which Kroger makes contributions. "The new law ... will not affect Kroger's tax deduction with respect to the contributions that it makes to those plans," according to the company's filing.

AT&T's charge, for example, is large because it has the largest privately-employed union workforce in the nation and covers those retirees.

In all, the companies in the Standard and Poor's 500 Index will take a combined hit of $4.5 billion to first-quarter earnings, estimates David Zion, an analyst with Credit Suisse.

[AZRedhawk44]

My dad works for Deere.

We talked about this over Easter a little bit.  He, and the bulk of the rest of the company, are more than a little pleased with themselves by opening the first salvo against the loonies in DC.

[Waitone]

Latest rumor out there is Verizon is preparing to axe 12,000 employees because of known costs associated with Obamacare.  If measures are not taken, Verizon is preparing an $800 million charge.  Waxman wants fat cat CEO to appear before his committee and justify what they are doing.  I would hope one or two would lay the wood to Waxman's shins.  I expect nothing of the kind to happen.

[mtnbkr]

VZ has been waxing employees left and right for several years now.  They've needed to cut head count ever since the MCI acquisition.  While I was still there (last day was Jan 1st of this year), there was the real possibility more than the number above were going to be cut or phased out via attrition over the next year.  It was one of the reasons I left.  With my contract coming to an end, I wasn't going to be around long if I didn't have another contract to immediately jump into.

I'm sure Obamacare didn't help, but it wasn't the sole reason.

Chris

[Regolith]

Just a quick update:

Inquiry Says Health Care Charges Were Proper
By ROBERT PEAR

WASHINGTON — When major companies declared that a provision of the new health care law would hurt earnings, Democrats were skeptical. But after investigating, House Democrats have concluded that the companies were right to tell investors and the government about the expected adverse effects of the law on their financial results.

At issue is a section of the law that eliminates a tax break available to companies that provide drug benefits to retirees as part of their insurance coverage. The tax change, expected to generate $4.5 billion of revenue over the next 10 years, will help offset the cost of providing coverage to the uninsured.

Within days after President Obama signed the law on March 23, companies filed reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission, saying the tax change would have a material adverse effect on their earnings.

The White House suggested that companies were exaggerating the effects of the tax change. The commerce secretary, Gary F. Locke, said the companies were being “premature and irresponsible” in taking such write-downs.

Representative Henry A. Waxman of California and Bart Stupak of Michigan, both Democrats, opened an investigation and demanded that four companies — AT&T, Caterpillar, Deere and Verizon — supply documents analyzing the “impact of health care reform,” together with an explanation of their accounting methods.

The documents — hundreds of pages of e-mail messages and financial worksheets — include large amounts of data that substantiate the companies’ concerns. They have reignited a battle over the law in Congress.

Representative Joe L. Barton of Texas, the senior Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said, “From a financial standpoint, from a purely economic standpoint, many companies would be better off discontinuing health care as a fringe benefit, paying the penalty and pocketing the savings.”

In a memorandum summarizing its investigation, the Democratic staff of the committee said, “The companies acted properly and in accordance with accounting standards in submitting filings to the S.E.C. in March and April.”

Moreover, it said, “these one-time charges were required by applicable accounting rules.” The committee staff said this view was confirmed by independent experts at the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the American Academy of Actuaries.

Mr. Waxman, the chairman of the committee, and Mr. Stupak canceled a hearing at which they had planned to question executives on the effects of the law.

A tabulation by the United States Chamber of Commerce shows that at least 40 companies have taken charges against earnings that total $3.4 billion since the law was signed.

“Companies like AT&T, Verizon and a range of stakeholder associations are hopeful that the benefits of the new law will outweigh the costs,” Mr. Waxman and Mr. Stupak said in a memorandum to committee members. “But they cannot quantify the benefits until the law is implemented.”

AT&T, which took a $995 million charge to reflect the impact of the health care overhaul, said it would be “evaluating prospective changes to the active and retiree health care benefits offered by the company.”

Under another provision, employers may be subject to financial penalties if they do not offer health insurance to employees. Documents provided to Congress by AT&T indicate that its medical costs in 2009 were $4.7 billion, divided about equally between active employees and retirees — far more than it would pay in penalties if it did not provide coverage.

Verizon said it was taking a $970 million charge against earnings because of the change in tax treatment of a subsidy it receives for retiree drug coverage. In addition, Verizon said it could be affected by a new tax on high-cost health plans that takes effect in 2018.

“Many of the plans that Verizon offers to employees and retirees are projected to have costs above the thresholds in the legislation and will be subject to the 40 percent excise tax,” the company told employees.

In a general analysis of the new law, Verizon said, “To avoid additional costs and regulations, employers may consider exiting the employer health market and send employees” to state-run insurance exchanges, where people can buy insurance.

A Caterpillar executive made a similar point in an e-mail message to colleagues, saying the tax changes could “drive many employers to just drop coverage for retirees altogether, and let the government foot the whole bill.”

Caterpillar, the maker of construction equipment, said Monday that it was taking a $90 million charge to earnings because of taxes resulting from the new health care law.

In addition, according to documents provided to Congress, Caterpillar could incur new costs because the law eliminates lifetime limits on coverage, and certain children would be allowed to stay on their parents’ insurance until their 26th birthday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/business/27health.html

[Monkeyleg]

Why do they need a committee and hearings and demands for documents to show what we peasants were saying all along? 

[sanglant]

because they REALLY wanted to believe the obama's lies?

[alex_trebek]

IF (and this is a BIG if) companies cut their health benefits all together, people will then stop withholding income taxes to avoid the penalty (assuming they don't get insurance).

If that happens then every April 15th the people will be writing checks to the IRS instead of getting a refund.

This is an extremely unlikely scenario, but I always thought that if income tax withholding was banned, a lot in this country would be better.

Why do they need a committee and hearings and demands for documents to show what we peasants were saying all along? 

Honestly, the statists think they are smarter than the peasants. If they were, they would be running these companies (and not into the ground). I think politicians have proven their inability to perform basic arithmatic, so I really don't see how they were going to find errors in the companies' estimates.

[makattak]

IF (and this is a BIG if) companies cut their health benefits all together, people will then stop withholding income taxes to avoid the penalty (assuming they don't get insurance).

If that happens then every April 15th the people will be writing checks to the IRS instead of getting a refund.

This is an extremely unlikely scenario, but I always thought that if income tax withholding was banned, a lot in this country would be better.

Honestly, the statists think they are smarter than the peasants. If they were, they would be running these companies (and not into the ground). I think politicians have proven their inability to perform basic arithmatic, so I really don't see how they were going to find errors in the companies' estimates.

I have to ask because I'm uncertain, but is it even possible to choose not to have your income tax withheld?

I was under the impression the Feds will crack down on you for doing that.

[alex_trebek]

I have to ask because I'm uncertain, but is it even possible to choose not to have your income tax withheld?

I was under the impression the Feds will crack down on you for doing that.

I withhold mine, and it is the defacto method. My Dad refuses to because it is an interest free loan to the government. I agree with him, but don't want the hassle. Also I am paranoid and think "what if someone steals my identity in early april, and drains my checking account?" I realize these scenarios are very unlikely, and I usually maintain at least 20% savings rate anyway, it is simply worth it not to have to worry.

I digress, I know it is possible, but don't know how.  Your HR dept probably knows.
 

[PTK]

*sigh*

After reading that NY Times article, I'm shocked more people didn't already realize those issues.

Fixing the price or availability on something in this manner strikes me as the same as bread prices being fixed - the desired effect isn't achieved, and the polar opposite occurs.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I have to ask because I'm uncertain, but is it even possible to choose not to have your income tax withheld?

I was under the impression the Feds will crack down on you for doing that.

I believe it's possible to claim additional exemptions on the tax withholding form.  Doing so will reduce your weekly/monthly withholding from your paycheck, possibly even reduce your withholding to zero.

My Dad refuses to because it is an interest free loan to the government.
 

I don't think that's quite right.  Income taxes are due when they're earned, not when you file on April 15.  The April filing is supposed to be nothing more than a reconciling of the books, matching up what you actually paid during the year against what you should have paid.  Paying your entire income tax obligation on April 15 would actually represent an interest free loan from FedGov to you.  Not that I'd have a problem with that.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

My "day job" company is going through their yearly insurance and benefits stuff right now.  We run on a plan year from June to May, rather than Jan to Dec.  So we're in the process of selecting the insurance carriers and plans available for employees for the next year.

Each and every frikkin' plan is way up in cost, usually by about 30% or 40%.  Some of the carriers are willing to state flat-out that the increases are due to new requirements in the health care legislation, others decline to give any explanation for the increases.  But the bottom line is clear:  we're only two months into Obama care and health care prices are already up 1/3 to 1/2.

My company isn't able to fund the entire monthly health insurance premium for employees anymore.  For the first time employees are being asked to kick in a coupla hundred bucks a month for their insurance, and the coverage is worse now than in past years.

Yay socialized medicine!

[alex_trebek]

I don't think that's quite right.  Income taxes are due when they're earned, not when you file on April 15.  The April filing is supposed to be nothing more than a reconciling of the books, matching up what you actually paid during the year against what you should have paid.  Paying your entire income tax obligation on April 15 would actually represent an interest free loan from FedGov to you.  Not that I'd have a problem with that.

Fair enough. I don't want to mess with it, I just withhold the maximum. To me, it isn't worth the hassle. FTR I have no idea how he does it, I just know he purposely withholds some amount less than what he owes (maybe exactly what he thinks he will owe), and writes a large check on April 15th and he also drives my mom insane.

Of course he will find a way to do the latter regardless. 

[Perd Hapley]

I withhold mine, and it is the defacto method. My Dad refuses to because it is an interest free loan to the government.

I don't think that's quite right.  Income taxes are due when they're earned, not when you file on April 15.  The April filing is supposed to be nothing more than a reconciling of the books, matching up what you actually paid during the year against what you should have paid.  Paying your entire income tax obligation on April 15 would actually represent an interest free loan from FedGov to you.  Not that I'd have a problem with that.

Any overpayment (refund) is money you shouldn't have payed in taxes, but still allowed the .gov to keep for a while.  That's what makes it a no-interest loan to the govt.  Paying owed taxes on April 15 isn't really a loan, since it wasn't the govt's money to start with, it was yours.  Paying on April 15th is simply a delayed payment. 

[taurusowner]

I agree the country would be far better off if there was no withholding.  If people had to save up money and sit down and cut a check to the government, they would be a lot more concerned with where that money is going.  But as it stands, they never really see that money in the first place, so it's like it's not really there.  Out of sight out of mind.

[sanglant]

just something to think about for the with holders, this year some states are having trouble paying back tax refunds.