SCOTUS Ruling Means Bigger, More Intrusive IRS [ IRS now can look at your kids income too ]

foxbusiness.com ^ | July 3 2012 | Fox News

[NoLibZone]

IRS officials on background tell FOX Business the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on health reform gives the IRS even more powers than previously understood.

The IRS now gets to know about a small business's entire payroll, the level of their insurance coverage -- and it gets to know the income of not just the primary breadwinner in your house, but your entire family’s income, in order to assess/collect the mandated tax.

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/06/29/scotus-ruling-means-bigger-more-intrusive-irs/#ixzz1zaTFEJT5

[E. Pluribus Unum]

All you property is belong to us.

[ozzymandus]

EVERYTHING expands the power of the IRS.

[Marathoner]

If Romney really wants to be elected President, he’d damn well better come out swinging at all the garbage in this thing and not let up.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Barry’s 1600 new “green” jobs. It’s just a different kind of “green” in this case.

[txrangerette]

Question:

The law that says you can’t have a tax based lawsuit until the tax takes effect and harms you...

Why does that not control here, rather than Roberts’ babbling decision??

I realize the suit that was brought was based on the commerce clause, but that Roberts decided to call it a tax so he could keep from overturning the law.

But that would mean Roberts gets to make the law a tax law just by saying it is, and besides that, his is just one opinion. The libs did not join him on calling it a tax, isn’t that correct? They upheld it on commerce clause grounds, didn’t they?

So where is the majority for upholding it as a tax, and what about the law that says a tax law can’t be adjudicated until it becomes effective?

What am I missing?

A Rush caller brought this up and claimed the ruling isn’t really an upholding of the law as a tax, even though it’s purported to be.

Rush seemed to agree.

[NTHockey]

Companies better start divesting/spinning off entities to get under the 50 employee threshhold. I can see a whole lot of under the table payments, and Greek-style tax evasion.

Might as well sell all you’ve got and get off the grid.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Question: The law that says you can’t have a tax based lawsuit until the tax takes effect and harms you... Why does that not control here, rather than Roberts’ babbling decision?? I realize the suit that was brought was based on the commerce clause, but that Roberts decided to call it a tax so he could keep from overturning the law. But that would mean Roberts gets to make the law a tax law just by saying it is, and besides that, his is just one opinion. The libs did not join him on calling it a tax, isn’t that correct? They upheld it on commerce clause grounds, didn’t they? So where is the majority for upholding it as a tax, and what about the law that says a tax law can’t be adjudicated until it becomes effective? What am I missing?

Roberts' decision held that the individual mandate was not a "tax" for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act, so that it could be challenged before payment, but then decided that it was a "tax" for purposes of the Constitution.

A Rush caller brought this up and claimed the ruling isn’t really an upholding of the law as a tax, even though it’s purported to be.

There is a doctrine that, when there is no one opinion joined into by five justices, then the "holding" that is binding on the lower courts is whichever opinion for the majority is the narrowest. So the holding of the case is that the mandate is a tax.

[TheBattman]

Indeed, Romney has a LOT of work to do to EARN my vote. I have resolved to not just cast a vote “against” Obama. If Romney doesn’t EARN my vote, he’s not getting it. I went through that with McLame in 2008. I vowed to not play that game again.

[nascarnation]

This will be a “full employment” act for high priced attorneys.

[nascarnation]

Assuming everybody in your family is filing tax returns currently, doesn’t the IRS already know that number?

[twister881]

The 4 lefty and 1 pea-brained SCOTUS justices should be at the head of the line to have their IRS-mandated rectal / pelvic audits.

[agondonter]

Congress and the Supreme Court is exempt from Obamataxcare. I can’t believe that anyone in Washington really gives a flying flip about it. All it means to them is votes!! I am so thoroughly disgusted.

[FlingWingFlyer]

I expect our courts to be totally overloaded with “malpractice” lawsuits. ObamaTaxCare is the “freerider’s” American Dream.

[phockthis]

The privilege against self-incrimination does not permit a taxpayer to refuse to obey a summons issued under IRC 7602 or a court order directing his appearance. He is required to appear and cannot use the Fifth Amendment as an excuse for failure to do so, although he may exercise it in connection with specific questions. He cannot refuse to bring his records, but may decline to submit them for inspection on Constitutional grounds. In the Vader case [U.S. v. Vader, 119 F.Supp. 330], the Government moved to hold a taxpayer in contempt of court for refusal to obey a court order to produce his books and records. He refused to submit them for inspection by the Government, basing his refusal on the Fifth Amendment. The court denied the motion to hold him in contempt, holding that disclosure of his assets would provide a starting point for a tax evasion case.