H&R Block to see increased revenue due to Obamacare

[himkhan]

So, have minimum coverage for yourself or pay into the public coffers that are going to be needed to cover your bills when you hurt yourself and can't afford it. Is that about it? If so, works for me. I'm all for people not freeloading.

New plan for 2015.

$160 a month with a $400 in network $800 out of network deductible. $15 co pays, $7/14/21 for scripts.

Thanks Obama.

 

[OverVolt]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/28/u...tViewed&version=Full&src=mv&WT.nav=MostViewed

This is what I was referring to earlier. The NYT can say it better than me.

This is VERY real and not some partisan hack bullshit if you know anything about healthcare and medicare reimbursement rates and such.

 

[Pulsar]

H&R Block fluffs up their prospects for investors. The American Stinker uses that to froth up the usual outrage from the usual chumps & Boomerang is here to embellish the whole deal with his usual mewling.

Odds are that he's covered by an employer sponsored plan as are most Americans so he tied his panties in a knot over faux compassion for the pitiful paperwork plight of his fellow citizens.

Must be a slow day for outrage, but he'll find some. Can't live without it, apparently.

Why do you always have to act like such an idiot? He gave a very factual post with no 'embellishment' at all, linked to supporting information, and made some truthful statements. Which is much more than I could say about 99% of your posts.

 

[boomerang]

Cool, so H&R Block is a good investment opportunity.

Thanks for bringing us the news!!

They might be, but they have diversified themselves. I would suggest doing some research before doing any investing.

And even though you're attempting to be snarky, you're welcome.

 

[Jhhnn]

Why do you always have to act like such an idiot? He gave a very factual post with no 'embellishment' at all, linked to supporting information, and made some truthful statements. Which is much more than I could say about 99% of your posts.

Facts? What about inconvenient facts, the ones conservatives always have trouble with?

The fact is that H&R Block offered up projections of increased revenue to their investors. That does not mean those projections are fact, no matter how desperately the Stinker & Boomerang represent them to be. Those projections are standard Wall St marketing fluff that may or may not come true.

The fact is that the vast, vast majority of Americans won't deal with the paperwork of intermittent coverage because their coverage will be continuous. Boomerang attempts to deny that in his opening sentence-

Our tax prep will be more complicated for the 2014 tax year with a number of new forms that must be filled out.

His "our" covers only a small subset of taxpayers & likely not him at all. It's the first sentence & is deliberately misleading, a common propaganda technique.

 

[Pulsar]

Facts? What about inconvenient facts, the ones conservatives always have trouble with?

The fact is that H&R Block offered up projections of increased revenue to their investors. That does not mean those projections are fact, no matter how desperately the Stinker & Boomerang represent them to be. Those projections are standard Wall St marketing fluff that may or may not come true.

The fact is that the vast, vast majority of Americans won't deal with the paperwork of intermittent coverage because their coverage will be continuous. Boomerang attempts to deny that in his opening sentence-

His "our" covers only a small subset of taxpayers & likely not him at all. It's the first sentence & is deliberately misleading, a common propaganda technique.

Are you drunk? Or high? Or both?

 

[inachu]

The funny part is that if you are a scientologist,christian scientists(THOSE CSM PEOPLE),AMISH you do not have to pay insurance at all as those religions are based on self reliance.

 

[DCal430]

Because there are too many variables for such deductions to be accurate. Being uninsured for one month is obviously different from being uninsured the whole year & there's no way to tell until after the fact.

The easy way to avoid the paperwork & payment is to stay insured, through your employer, the exchange or Medicaid. It's unfortunate that people who'd qualify for medicaid expansion but live in non-compliant states will need to deal with it, but that's not the fault of the federal govt at all.

What us worst is these people who live in non compliant states do not qualify for any credits for healthcare.

 

[alzan]

They might be, but they have diversified themselves. I would suggest doing some research before doing any investing.

And even though you're attempting to be snarky, you're welcome.

You thought I was serious when I said it was a good investment opportunity?

Gullible much?

 

[Slew Foot]

Just say youre one of those religions that doesnt belive in insurance, done.

 

[boomerang]

You thought I was serious when I said it was a good investment opportunity?

Gullible much?

No, I was being a dick - just like you.

 

[boomerang]

What us worst is these people who live in non compliant states do not qualify for any credits for healthcare.

That's the way the law was drafted. It was purposeful in an attempt to force states to set up their own exchanges. We suspected it and Gruber verified it time and again on video. The SCOTUS will end up gutting the legislation this year because of it. The architects of Obamacare gambled and it appears they will lose.

 

[theeedude]

You can talk to your state government about opening an exchange if you want subsidies. If not, California thanks you for ours

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

So, have minimum coverage for yourself or pay into the public coffers that are going to be needed to cover your bills when you hurt yourself and can't afford it. Is that about it? If so, works for me. I'm all for people not freeloading.

No, if I am understanding this correctly -

If YOU have minimum coverage, but your WIFE does not have minimum coverage, BOTH you AND YOUR WIFE must pay the penalty, even though you have the minimum coverage, you will be paying the penalty as if you don't.

Or vice-versa for a child (instead of your wife).

Correct me if I'm wrong here?? Basically, if 1 person in your family doesn't have minimum coverage, ALL of your family is screwed and has to pay the penalty? If so - HOL-Y-SHITE. Someone is out to screw poor people....

 

[Sonikku]

H&R Block to see increased revenue due to Obamacare

Think of it from Mcowned's point of view. Put another way, it's kind of like saying "Business now benefiting from Obama's policies". Way to stimulate the economy Mr. Prez!

 

[theeedude]

Love the progression of right wing criticism of Obamacare. From death panels, to its going to crash the economy, to H&R block is making too much money

 

[werepossum]

I guess this is off the beaten path a little bit, but I enjoyed yelling at my insurance company when they tried to use a bunch of new industry terms on me to bullshit me. I called them because they didn't cover an event they should have, and they tried to start talking to be about co-insurance and shared liability and a bunch of other bullshit. It was enjoyable to tell them point blank to shut hell up, that I have a copay and NOTHING else, and that I do not have 'co-insurance' or 'shared liability' or any other term they wanted to make up to try to confuse me.

I have health insurance that covers everything with a co-pay, and I have my little card that tells me what the co-pay is. They can take the rest of their intentionally confusing mumbo-jumbo and shove it up their ass =). They ran back with their tail between their legs and paid it.

Anyway... I won't see any increase in complexity on my taxes since my company provides my health care. Why can the government just auto-deduct the amounts like they do with SS and FICA and then just clean up the errors at the end of the year? Why the need for more complexity?

We need more complexity because it is government cleaning up the errors at the end of the year. For most of us, this is just a lot more "no" answers. For most of the rest, it's "yes" and then explaining and documenting. Only if you don't/didn't have insurance is this a big negative.

That's the way the law was drafted. It was purposeful in an attempt to force states to set up their own exchanges. We suspected it and Gruber verified it time and again on video. The SCOTUS will end up gutting the legislation this year because of it. The architects of Obamacare gambled and it appears they will lose.

I'll be surprised if that happens. SCOTUS is generally not in the business of reducing government's power, and went through gyrations to avoid gutting it the first time around.

 

[Fern]

Facts? What about inconvenient facts, the ones conservatives always have trouble with?

The fact is that H&R Block offered up projections of increased revenue to their investors. That does not mean those projections are fact, no matter how desperately the Stinker & Boomerang represent them to be. Those projections are standard Wall St marketing fluff that may or may not come true.

The fact is that the vast, vast majority of Americans won't deal with the paperwork of intermittent coverage because their coverage will be continuous. Boomerang attempts to deny that in his opening sentence-



His "our" covers only a small subset of taxpayers & likely not him at all. It's the first sentence & is deliberately misleading, a common propaganda technique.

"Intermittent coverage" is not the only reason for additional tax return paperwork complication(s).

And H&R Bloch is but one calling attention to additional complexities.

Form 8962 is new form and required for those who received a tax credit (subsidy) for their HI. As of April this was reported to be 6.7 million. Apparently many more people have enrolled since April.

Those who must file Form 8962 cannot file the simple 1040EZ and will need to move to the more complicated 1040.

Form 8965 is a new form and required for those who do not have qualifying HI but will be applying for one of the exemptions to the penalty. The CBO estimated that 23 million people will qualify for an exemption; many will need to file this form.

Additionally, IIRC, about 6 million are expected to pay the penalty. This is going to require some additional tax/penalty calculations.

I believe that employers and HI companies must file a new Form 1095 to report coverage etc. I'm not sure but it appears that people will need to attach these to their tax returns when filing. It is feared that this will cause problems, particularly for those who used to be early filers. If required, but not attached, one would expect further complications. I.e., correspondence and such with the IRS.

I believe the IRS must still issue official/final instructions etc, so I think it a bit premature to gauge the magnitude of complications caused by theACA/Obamacare and its being administered through our tax system. However, it does appear at this time that it may affect 10's of millions of individual (people, not companies etc) filers.

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2014/...mplicated-aca-tax-forms-could-cause-problems/

Fern

 

[Fern]

-snip-
Anyway... I won't see any increase in complexity on my taxes since my company provides my health care. Why can the government just auto-deduct the amounts like they do with SS and FICA and then just clean up the errors at the end of the year? Why the need for more complexity?

I'm not sure what "deduction" you're referring to, and I suspect you meant "can't" and not "can".

But to answer your question (if you're referring to the penalty) SS/FICA is based upon wages. That is a simple calculation. The penalty is not tied to your wages like SS/FICA and so cannot reasonably be withheld based upon wages.

Fern

 

[OverVolt]

Love the progression of right wing criticism of Obamacare. From death panels, to its going to crash the economy, to H&R block is making too much money

No... its a typical paperwork headache, which is predictable when the government gets involved. You're an idiot honestly. Do you file your own taxes or does your mommy do it still?

 

[theeedude]

No... its a typical paperwork headache, which is predictable when the government gets involved. You're an idiot honestly. Do you file your own taxes or does your mommy do it still?

How do those straws feel in your grasp?

 

[OverVolt]

..

 

[Attic]

Sounds efficient.

 

[Jhhnn]

"Intermittent coverage" is not the only reason for additional tax return paperwork complication(s).

And H&R Bloch is but one calling attention to additional complexities.

Form 8962 is new form and required for those who received a tax credit (subsidy) for their HI. As of April this was reported to be 6.7 million. Apparently many more people have enrolled since April.

Those who must file Form 8962 cannot file the simple 1040EZ and will need to move to the more complicated 1040.

Form 8965 is a new form and required for those who do not have qualifying HI but will be applying for one of the exemptions to the penalty. The CBO estimated that 23 million people will qualify for an exemption; many will need to file this form.

Additionally, IIRC, about 6 million are expected to pay the penalty. This is going to require some additional tax/penalty calculations.

I believe that employers and HI companies must file a new Form 1095 to report coverage etc. I'm not sure but it appears that people will need to attach these to their tax returns when filing. It is feared that this will cause problems, particularly for those who used to be early filers. If required, but not attached, one would expect further complications. I.e., correspondence and such with the IRS.

I believe the IRS must still issue official/final instructions etc, so I think it a bit premature to gauge the magnitude of complications caused by theACA/Obamacare and its being administered through our tax system. However, it does appear at this time that it may affect 10's of millions of individual (people, not companies etc) filers.

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2014/...mplicated-aca-tax-forms-could-cause-problems/

Fern

What it amounts to is that people who received thousands in subsidies will have to do some extra paperwork. The hourly pay rate on that looks to be outstanding. The other set of people affected are those who failed to sign up or had intermittent coverage as I offered earlier. How many people it "may" affect remains to be seen.

 

[tracerbullet]

lol

I pay $618/mo for a $10K deductible.

Glad I'm not freeloading.

Idiot. You should keep lurking.

So are you going to be fined this year? Doesn't look like it. Yes you are? I apologize, stand corrected, and can pretend to commiserate if you'd like. No? Then you're not freeloading and I wasn't talking to you, idiot.

No, if I am understanding this correctly -

If YOU have minimum coverage, but your WIFE does not have minimum coverage, BOTH you AND YOUR WIFE must pay the penalty, even though you have the minimum coverage, you will be paying the penalty as if you don't.

Or vice-versa for a child (instead of your wife).

Correct me if I'm wrong here?? Basically, if 1 person in your family doesn't have minimum coverage, ALL of your family is screwed and has to pay the penalty? If so - HOL-Y-SHITE. Someone is out to screw poor people....

Sort of, it seems to be up to an individual and their dependents, meaning kids but not spouses. But it does hit household income, though above some sort of threshold, and only up to I think the amount it would cost for the bare minimum coverage. The really poor folks likely won't make that threshold?