Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Headless Thompson Gunner on March 26, 2010, 06:49:45 PM
-
How much is the new health care bill going to cost businesses? So far, the following companies have announced new charges appearing in their accounting statements to reflect the costs of Obamacare:
Caterpiller: $100 million
John Deere: $150 million
3M: $85 million
AK Steel: $31 million
AT&T: $1 billion (!)
Valero Energy: $15 million
Honeywell: ~$35 million
I'm sure we'll hear from moar companies in the coming weeks...
-
UTC is gonna get nailed for at least half a billion, just from that $2k per employee tax.
-
Invacare has stated that if this passed, they would pull up stakes and move to Mexico, as they would no longer be profitable under Pbocare's taxes.
-
Hmmm, it might not be a bad idea to buy some "in the money" puts on these if I can find out which reporting period they are going to report the liability... (Although looking at 3M, it looks like it might already be priced in?) Something to ponder though. ???
-
Are those charges for current and future retiree medical benefits? Boy, other than some union people, I wonder who gets retiree medical benefits any more.
-
Wow, that's money that they cannot/will not be used to hire new employees with, that could go into R&D, employee wages or stock dividends to investors. This will mean higher priced products to you and I. Lower wages to current employees or at the least a pay freeze.
Thank you obama. Trickle down poverty.
-
and more jobs moving away from free? states. :facepalm: well i guess THE obama really did help the poor,,,,,,,,,,, in mexico and china. =|
-
Heh. I mentioned something like this to a buddy of mine yesterday.
I told him that the new bill will basically tax everybody.
His response was, "They only tax people who make a certain amount and you and I will never ever make that much."
Then I told him that if he thought we wouldn't be effected by our employers being taxed this much he was dumb.
His response to that was, "Pfft, yea, the only thing it'll do to them will make them maybe not break profit records every year."
I wasn't sure he was serious, until he told me to stop watching that Faux News BS.
-
"Pfft, yea, the only thing it'll do to them will make them maybe not break profit records every year."
Oh, Democrats. They want prosperity, they just don't want anyone to be prosperous.
-
Oh, Democrats. They want prosperity, they just don't want anyone to be prosperous.
Yea, he worked for Wal-Mart for a very long time. He pretty much detests big businesses.
-
Boy, other than some union people, I wonder who gets retiree medical benefits any more.
My mother gets medical benefits thanks to my late father's pension arrangements.
My current employer offers retiree medical benefits as part of the pension program, provided you retire before 2013; that was the arrangement when I was hired. Retire after that and retiree medical is sharply curtailed. (I can take an early retirement in 2012, but would get shafted on my pension - plenty of years of service, but I'm still too young. So I'm getting screwed either way. :mad: )
-
AT&T has already been cutting head count, both union and non union workers.
I expect it to continue. Being pretty low on the totem pole I'll be surprised if I don't get hit before the year is out.
-
Invacare has stated that if this passed, they would pull up stakes and move to Mexico, as they would no longer be profitable under Pebocare's taxes.
Enough of this PEBO crap.
-
AT&T has already been cutting head count, both union and non union workers.
I expect it to continue. Being pretty low on the totem pole I'll be surprised if I don't get hit before the year is out.
So was/is Verizon, which was one of the motivating factors in my leaving. I wasn't under immediate threat, and with a clearance, was fairly valuable to them. Still, I went looking and found a better job for more money, so it's all good.
Chris
-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704100604575146002445136066.html
Oh, the Democrats are angry about this, too...
Meanwhile, Henry Waxman and House Democrats announced yesterday that they will haul these companies in for an April 21 hearing because their judgment "appears to conflict with independent analyses, which show that the new law will expand coverage and bring down costs."
So, these companies are REQUIRED by the SEC to disclose changes to their long term expenses or face criminal charges. But since it is politically inconvenient for the Democrats, they're going to bring them before congress to try to crucify them.
Hmm... I always wondered what the beginnings of a Latin-American thugocracy would feel like.
-
...or at the least a pay freeze.
My pay's already frozen, this just means it'll be frozen longer or frozen until my employer axes my division to cut costs in order to pay for the healthcare, melting my pay to zero.
-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704100604575146002445136066.html
Oh, the Democrats are angry about this, too...
So, these companies are REQUIRED by the SEC to disclose changes to their long term expenses or face criminal charges. But since it is politically inconvenient for the Democrats, they're going to bring them before congress to try to crucify them.
Hmm... I always wondered what the beginnings of a Latin-American thugocracy would feel like.
I feel warm and fuzzy, like the gentle glow of a ray of sunshine. Benovolency makes everyone feel like this.
Seriously though:
were these costs longterm (20 years) or per year for the forseeable future? I must have missed that part...
-
Enough of this PEBO crap.
He called the tune, I'm just mocking it.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.christmasghost.com%2Farchives%2Fobama%2520being%2520super%2520creepy%2520again.jpg&hash=d4cd4170afe7442f1e443ea614eb903ea8480071)
Besides, I'm lacking a better term for this nonsense. "Pelosi Care" gives the harpy way too much credit, It's Obama's baby.
-
Why do you think Obama thought it necessary to hit the campaign trail to convince the subjects of the value of his health legislation. He knew the charges were coming because company lobbyists said so. All things considered it may be fortunate the impact was so soon; just to keep the taxpayer's interest from waning.
-
there's always P.BO =D or about 15 names i ain't going to post. [popcorn] let's just say he would prefer P.BO. :angel:
-
President Elect Barack Obama = PEBO, PEBOcare
Problem being, he is no longer president elect, he is the actual, "took oath of office" POTUS.
IMO, BHO deserved ribbing for his "Office of the President Elect," but that time is past.
Now, PBOcare is accurate, as is BOcare. CommieCare is nice & provocative.
-
Now, PBOcare is accurate, as is BOcare. CommieCare is nice & provocative.
Those are pretty good substitutes.
my original, offensive post has been modified ;/
-
Not to point out the obvious but we actually have a stickied thread at the top of this forum about using derisive nicknames ie. Nicknames... McStain, Hitlery, George W Fistful, etc....
-
Semantics.
I'm not comparing the guy to mass murderers or commie dictators (redundant) I'm using the name that the arrogant wanker gave himself.
-
So now we're calling the president a wanker? That's even more of an insult than the other names in this thread.
-
Seriously though:
were these costs longterm (20 years) or per year for the forseeable future? I must have missed that part...
They were reported as either one-time charges, or current year charges, depending on the company.
They are NOT costs allocated over a number of years.
-
Y'all, please don't get this thread locked over the name-calling thing. I'd like to be able to udpate the list periodically as new companies announce their own Obama health care burdens.
-
So now we're calling the president a wanker? That's even more of an insult than the other names in this thread.
No, we were splitting hairs over what I said initially :facepalm: Nevermind though, I'll say no more in the spirit of keeping this thread open.
-
They were reported as either one-time charges, or current year charges, depending on the company.
They are NOT costs allocated over a number of years.
What will be interesting over the next couple of reporting periods is to see how companies like Microsoft and Google react. The companies that are making noise right now are the ones that have heavy union contracts which include healthcare. They do not have a choice about paying it. But, some of the tech companies which do not have such restrictive contracts may opt to drop their employer paid healthcare and pay the fines rather than get slaughtered (pardon the pun) in earnings season.
-
So now we're calling the president a wanker? That's even more of an insult than the other names in this thread.
This being America, we're allowed expected to insult our politicians as a matter of patriotic duty. It's the nick-names, not the insults, that are looked down upon by the mods.
-
What will be interesting over the next couple of reporting periods is to see how companies like Microsoft and Google react. The companies that are making noise right now are the ones that have heavy union contracts which include healthcare. They do not have a choice about paying it. But, some of the tech companies which do not have such restrictive contracts may opt to drop their employer paid healthcare and pay the fines rather than get slaughtered (pardon the pun) in earnings season.
Yep.
It will be interesting to see what the business environment looks like after everyone has made (and reported) their accounting corrections necessitated by Obamacare. I wonder just how much this new law is going to cost. And I wonder how much damage it will do to the traditional employer/employee relationship. Time will tell, unfortunately.
It's one thing to campaign on a set of pie-in-the-sky promises, it's another thing entirely to be confronted by real world realities. I'm not sure how well Obama will handle the latter.
-
I'm not sure how well Obama will handle the latter.
I don't know a single person who is in favor of the bill who would give a damn about the damage to businesses. =|
Chris
-
I don't know a single person who is in favor of the bill who would give a damn about the damage to businesses. =|
Chris
Yep. I talked to a supporter of this bill who was totally unconcerned that this bill means the end of my family's 40+ year old business, a business that has been built by the toiling of my grandfather and father.
We were some of the best in what we did in the whole country. And we weren't making huge profits, either.
-
I don't know a single person who is in favor of the bill who would give a damn about the damage to businesses. =|
Chris
Of course they care about how it will affect private business. The damage it will do to the private sector is the icing on the cake.
-
"Well as long as it doesn't affect jobs......."
;/
-
Yep. I talked to a supporter of this bill who was totally unconcerned that this bill means the end of my family's 40+ year old business, a business that has been built by the toiling of my grandfather and father.
We were some of the best in what we did in the whole country. And we weren't making huge profits, either.
Here is what one said:
"I'm having a hard time finding sympathy for thieves. I get a little tired of worrying about the jobs and the fiscal condition of Insurance and Drug companies who spent several decades raping folks of their hard earned money, not because it was necessary, but because they *could*.
As far as I'm concerned... Those greedy bastards had their stint on the gravy train. I hope they invested wisely....
There are still a lot of problems with the bill... mainly in that it won't go into effect soon enough to save more lives... but it's more hope than I've had in a long time."
"Greedy bastards on the gravy train" would be folks like your family. Yes, that is exactly how they see folks that own businesses. No exaggeration. Any business (except their company/industry, sometimes) makes a profit by evil means. Not through providing services folks obviously wish to purchase.
-
Any business (except their company/industry, sometimes) makes a profit by evil means.
One thing I have noticed about libs... They view business as a zero-sum game. To a lib, if I buy a widget from Avenger for $1000, he gets $1000 and I lose $1000.
To a businessman, or really any conservative, I buy a widget from Avenger for $1000, he gets $1000. But usually the value of that widget is much more than $1000 to me because I will take the widget and go out make $1500 profit using it.
To a lib the whole transaction is worth $1000. To Avenger and I, it is a $2500 transaction. Near as I can tell, libs are just really miserable people that cannot see opportunity beyond their own noses and they punish us because we can.
-
Here is what one said:
"I'm having a hard time finding sympathy for thieves. I get a little tired of worrying about the jobs and the fiscal condition of Insurance and Drug companies who spent several decades raping folks of their hard earned money, not because it was necessary, but because they *could*.
As far as I'm concerned... Those greedy bastards had their stint on the gravy train. I hope they invested wisely....
There are still a lot of problems with the bill... mainly in that it won't go into effect soon enough to save more lives... but it's more hope than I've had in a long time."
"Greedy bastards on the gravy train" would be folks like your family. Yes, that is exactly how they see folks that own businesses. No exaggeration. Any business (except their company/industry, sometimes) makes a profit by evil means. Not through providing services folks obviously wish to purchase.
Sometimes I really wish we could give these people the society they say they want.
Then I remember I would have to live in that hellhole, too and it makes me rethink that.
-
They seem to think that companies have giant wells of money from which they can draw at any time to pay for whatever they want. They view the companies as greedy because they don't realize that companies have to price products competitively in order to survive.
These are the libs who are ignorant of how business works. What I don't understand are the wealthy liberals who own companies. How can one be a capitalist entrepeneur and a liberal? The two would seem to be mutually exclusive.
-
So now we're calling the president a wanker? That's even more of an insult than the other names in this thread.
Obamacare, PBcare, whatever you wanna call it it one of the more impressive value-destroying vehicles seen in decades.
These companies are reducing their earnings forecasts. They are reducing dividends.
Here is a Q&D look at the destruction:
As Andy noted earlier, companies are obliged by law to factor liabilities into their earnings statements. A reader writes to note one example:
3M Corporation announced that it was taking a 12 cent per share charge to earnings for the effects of the health care bill. The costs here are really of two varieties. First, is the hard costs that shows up on company’s income statement and is reflected in the reduced earnings per share. The second cost is the effect of the reduced earnings per share on the company’s market value. 3M sells for about 18 times its earnings per share which means that a 12 cent charge reduces the stock price by about $2.16. Multiply that by 711 million shares outstanding and you get a reduction in the market value of the company of about $1.5 billion.
That's one business. It would be interesting to know just how much value last Sunday's vote instantly vaporized at, say, the S&P 500 companies. We will soon enough.
-
They seem to think that companies have giant wells of money from which they can draw at any time to pay for whatever they want. They view the companies as greedy because they don't realize that companies have to price products competitively in order to survive.
These are the libs who are ignorant of how business works. What I don't understand are the wealthy liberals who own companies. How can one be a capitalist entrepeneur and a liberal? The two would seem to be mutually exclusive.
It's especially prevalent among unions. The only reason management doesn't pay the workers more is because management is greedy and selfish and exploitative.
-
One thing I have noticed about libs... They view business as a zero-sum game. To a lib, if I buy a widget from Avenger for $1000, he gets $1000 and I lose $1000.
To a businessman, or really any conservative, I buy a widget from Avenger for $1000, he gets $1000. But usually the value of that widget is much more than $1000 to me because I will take the widget and go out make $1500 profit using it.
To a lib the whole transaction is worth $1000. To Avenger and I, it is a $2500 transaction. Near as I can tell, libs are just really miserable people that cannot see opportunity beyond their own noses and they punish us because we can.
Just one more reason why, and others here are saying esentially the same thing, that there are two Americas forever divided by economic perspective and understanding who will never be reconciled except with major unhappiness to one or both. When views become that disparate, the answer is divorce, not counseling.
-
Just one more reason why, and others here are saying esentially the same thing, that there are two Americas forever divided by economic perspective and understanding who will never be reconciled except with major unhappiness to one or both. When views become that disparate, the answer is divorce, not counseling.
The only thing necessary to get reconciliation on this point is a little bit of economics education.
I had a flaming lifelong blue-collar union factory worker see the light not to long ago. All it took for him was a chance to see what it's like to try to run a business. He wasn't dumb, he'd just never been exposed to anything except the worker side of the worker/owner relationship, and all of his business and economics thought was one-sided.
-
Apparently Mr Waxman isn't thrilled with these dour revelations by major companies, wants to bring the CEOs to Capitol Hill for a come-to-jesus tv moment.
-
The only thing necessary to get reconciliation on this point is a little bit of economics education.
I had a flaming lifelong blue-collar union factory worker see the light not to long ago. All it took for him was a chance to see what it's like to try to run a business. He wasn't dumb, he'd just never been exposed to anything except the worker side of the worker/owner relationship, and all of his business and economics thought was one-sided.
I think you just the nail on the head. It seems to me that in years past to get through HS one had to take economics.
In this course called economics, once upon a time, they taught the basics of how businesses operate. They might have even applied this on an individual level so people would know if theycould really afford a house or not.
To top it all off, they made the course require more than a pulse for a passing grade.
Consider the government courses in HS as well. The teacher of mine talked about sex, cage dancing, and flipping off the FBI at Vietnam protests. I had the read for myself about how government works. If that changed people might realize that there exist a general correlation between gov spending/regs in an industry and the cost of that industry's products.
As long as ignorance prevails through laziness and lax policies regarding education, we shouldn't be surprised when it infects all levels of society.
-
Apparently Mr Waxman isn't thrilled with these dour revelations by major companies, wants to bring the CEOs to Capitol Hill for a come-to-jesus tv moment.
Waxman: I've just received word. There's been a battle. Your corporation is burning at the NY stock exchange. The invasion of US economy has been successful.
CEO stares at him.
CEO: ...don't... believe you...
Waxman(shrugs, unconcerned): There is no further need for information from you... our astroturf troops were successful in spite of your refusal to help me.
Waxman(small smile): You might have saved yourself a great deal of torment by yielding at the beginning.
CEO: I... want to see... neutral representative...
Waxman: There is no such person.
Waxman: The word will be that you perished with your accounting department. No one will ever know that you are here with us. As you will be, for a long, long time.
Waxman: You do, however, have a choice. You can live out your life in misery... held here, subject to my whims...
Waxman: Or you can live in comfort, with good food and warm clothing... women as you desire them... allowed to pursue your studies of philosophy and history. I would enjoy debating with you. You have a keen mind.
Waxman: It's up to you. A life of ease... of reflection and intellectual challenge... Or this.
CEO: What... must I... do... ?
Waxman: Nothing, really. Tell me how many lights you see.
Waxman: How many? How many lights?
Waxman: This is your last chance... the guards are coming... don't be a stubborn fool...
Waxman (hissing): How many?
The door opens and Pelosi ENTERS, accompanied by two guards. She surveys the scene.
Pelosi: You told me he would be ready to go.
Waxman: We had some unfinished business.
Pelosi: Get him cleaned up. A taxi is waiting to take him back to Wall Street.
ON CEO as he stares at Waxman, realizing that everything Waxman had said was a ruse... one last desperate effort to bend CEO to his will before the November Election.
CEO: There are four lights!
-
That fits so well, too... :lol:
-
Ahh APS the place where thread drift, individualism, guns, politics, and random star trek references collide.
If it were a tangible place I would never leave.
-
Ahh APS the place where thread drift, individualism, guns, politics, and random star trek references collide.
If it were a tangible place I would never leave.
Correct for $1,000. Aren't you supposed to be the host, though? :lol:
-
It gets lonely on the sidelines...... :'(
-
It may have been a Star Trek reference, but it had its roots in "1984".
-
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.
-
found it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8goGf__R0kg) =D, you know the actor(John Hurt?) has obama's ears. [tinfoil]
-
found it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8goGf__R0kg) =D, you know the actor(John Hurt?) has obama's ears. [tinfoil]
Encore has been running 1984 a lot lately. I watched it again last month. Chilling.
-
Boeing has announced a $150mil charge.
IIRC Verizon announced a $950mil charge.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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
-
Why do they need a committee and hearings and demands for documents to show what we peasants were saying all along? ;/
-
because they REALLY wanted to believe the obama's lies? :facepalm:
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
*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.
-
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.
-
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!
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
just something to think about for the with holders, this year some states are having trouble paying back tax refunds. [tinfoil]