Replies

First of all, I thank you for the work that went into this.

So, I’m trying to summarize what you say to see if I “get it”.
You say that the decision points out:
...that the mandate is a tax...
...that congress has the power to impose taxes...
...that those taxes do not apply to individuals...
...and...
...that Roberts is challenging “someone” to challenge the constitutionality of the tax...
...and...
...that he is offering them clues as to how to go about it.

Has no challenge to this ever made it to the Supreme Court?

Is there no stare decisis, precedent, or case law at the Supreme Court level
regarding the income tax as it may or may not apply to individuals?

As a bureaucrat I unfortunately understand what the author is doing and in some ways he is correct. However, unless I missed it he glossed over why this law is so dangerous to our freedom. The tax penalty applied to employers is low for the first few years. In fact it is an incentive to drop employer provided health care. The INTENDED consequence is more than 5% of the population Will lose health care and they will be forced into “exchanges”. Or they will be taxed by the IRS. These exchanges only work if we force people into them otherwise they will whither on the vine for lack of funds and participation. Romney claims he will exempt all 50 States, good start, without a repeal, simply raise the tax penalty on corporations with 25 or more employees to $20k per employee. Employers will keep their current plans, this will give Congress time to kill Obamatax through legislation. Imagine Dims arguing that evil corporations should not have to insure employees so as to increase their bottom line.

There are FEDERAL LAWS stating the I-tax doesn’t apply to individuals!!!! The US Supreme Courts state the right to live, work for a living is Unconstitutional!!!! The tax code states the SAME!!!