Whenever you get a tax break, the rest of the taxpayers have to make up the difference. Renters subsidize homeowners. Childless couples subsidize Families, etc...
So, using simple accounting, we have the following:
1) Company A spends $100 on insurance for retirees.
2) US Taxpayer cuts a check to Company A for $28.
3) When it comes to tax time, Company A declares a tax deduction of $100 for the insurance expense. So lets assume company a made $5,000, their taxable income would be $4,900.
Now under the Obama plan, step 1&2 would remain the same, but step three would look like this.
3) Company A declares a tax deduction of $72 dollars ($100- 28, the actual amount of money they spent for the insurance). So for $5,000, their taxable income would be $4,928.
What Obama is doing is more in line with standard tax practices. If you move to change jobs you can write that expense off, but if your company reimburses you, you have to declare that income.
We are created equal. What we do thereafter as far as success is really up to each premised upon merit not "equality" of redistribution. As well, what society chooses to subsidize e.g. marriage is premised upon societal merit.
As far as tax "breaks" -I look at these 'breaks' as paying less to government -giving less of what you rightly own -this is not subsidy.
As far as making up the "difference" -the goverment is creating this health care requirement and imposing it upon the people... Much like they now try to impose themselves with a carbon tax -cap and trade. Would you use the same arguments to suggest corporations subsidized if they as well do not pay thier "fair share" to the tyrant?
Sounds alot like class warfare premised "thats not fair" moral relative socialist arguments for redistribution of wealth under the 'social justice' banner to me and I don't buy it -principle does matter...
I do not want healthcare jammed down my throat and as such do not begrudge the private comapanies that suffer under this assault on freedom with me...
The big picture you seem to miss is all the non taxpayers being subsidized with this abortion called 'reform' -what about that? What about all the insurance companies being subsidized by mandated customers -what about that? What about all the brainless leftist bureaucrats riding desks in Washington DC -what about that subsidy?
It is real simple -your suggestion as to the companies only losing tax payer subsidy is crap on its face once you concede the fact that the supposed 'need' being subsidized is imposed by government and at its core is an unamerican socialist redistribution of wealth -much like the 'need' now being touted by Ozero and his greedy tree hugging clowns of global warming...