[Rocky]

House sales gains at least up to 500k for mfj are not subject to any obamacare tax.

That's what it says on Snopes, but in this case, Snopes is wrong. It's mfj of 250K, not 500K, which you can read for yourself earlier in the same Snopes article. The mistake they made was applying the 250K to both husband and wife, which is not the way the law is worded.

Note that Snopes is careful to attribute the erroneous example to someone else. It's as though they know it's wrong, but though they use it authoritatively to prove their point, they're shielded. It's not their fault.

Snopes is run by an extremely liberal couple.

[Cyropaedia]

That's what it says on Snopes, but in this case, Snopes is wrong. It's mfj of 250K, not 500K, which you can read for yourself earlier in the same Snopes article. The mistake they made was applying the 250K to both husband and wife, which is not the way the law is worded.

Spot on. Great rebuttal.

[justlurking]

hat's what it says on Snopes, but in this case, Snopes is wrong. It's mfj of 250K, not 500K, which you can read for yourself earlier in the same Snopes article. The mistake they made was applying the 250K to both husband and wife, which is not the way the law is worded.

I think you should cite the law in question, and explain your interpretation.

I did a quick search for "capital gains exclusion primary residence", and everyone of them says that it is $500,000 for a married couple filing jointly.

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/real-estate/capital-gains-home-sale-tax-break-a-boon-for-owners-1.aspx
http://taxes.about.com/od/capitalgains/qt/home_sale_tax2.htm
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p523/ar02.html#en_US_publink1000200711

[mellow velo]

You're confusing 2 different thresholds in the Snopes explanation. There's a taxable income threshold of $250k for married-filing jointly ($125k for single filers). But there's also a real estate capital gains threshold ... an exemption, actually. That's the one that goes up to $500k for mfj ($250k for singles).

Obamacare needs to be fought on the facts, not by spreading internet urban legends.

Easily rebutted, it makes the GOP look like fools for misreading the law in the way it was enacted.

[hinckley buzzard]

Of course, you are right, Snopes is bullshit. No serious person takes them seriously. The real issue is that this is not law, this is a regulatory matter, and can be changed at any time without notice by an anonymous bureaucrat.

There is no accountability in this fiasco of a bill.