Posted on 06/29/2012 1:39:20 PM PDT by tflabo
If the MANDATE in Obamacare only survives as a Tax, as ruled by the Supreme Court, how can anyone Waive Taxes with Obamacare Waivers ?
This and other questions still need to be answered, because we have Videos of Obama saying "This is not a Tax". ...
(Excerpt) Read more at jaytee3231157.newsvine.com ...
Ask John Roberts. He makes up laws as he goes anyway!
I am posting this on all threads that question the events that just happened:
Trust the Lord but work like the dickens to get the liberals out of power. Stop complaining because it does no good. Find solace that this is a Christian nation and He will work out the details. Trust in the Lord!
45% of the population already pay no income tax.
file that one under the “fairness” of the progressive tax code. (no waiver needed)
Simple. The administration is now saying its not a tax, it’s a penalty. Now that they have their law they can call it any damned thing they please. Capice?
If Congress cannot give the president a power to suspend part of a law....Umm, the President has shown he's perfectly willing to suspend/ignore part of a law without Congressional approval (See: Arizona).
Do you really think he'll give two hoots and a holler about what anyone thinks about waivers?
It's a mandate to donate or go to prison citation.
I wish you people would quit trying to nail Sr 0bama for being misleading when all he is is a lying sack of pig dung.
It's a Michelle 0bama plain and simple!
“Ask John Roberts. He makes up laws as he goes anyway!”
I never thought that anyone could sink lower than emanations and penumbras but Roberts has done it. If only he could be kicked off the court and stripped of his citezenship and sent packing.
Look sag—I get your point and the rest of the FReeps that its uber arrogance on Dear Leader and cronies. Subtract that just for now— I may be wrong but the President only has powers to raise or cut taxes done through congress. So Boy Bam the Sham has no constitutional authority to give waivers since that would be interfering with tax collections without the consent of congress even though they call it a penalty. My head is spinning too!
There have been no taxes levied as of yet.
Those subject to the tax should file a class action suit as denied equal protection under the law.
While I agree where are you going to take that argument. To the courts? The only remedy for this fiasco now lies in throwing the Dems out of power and repealing Obama care. That’s what everyone needs to focus on now.
Unfortunately legally (not that that matters), the bill did originate in the House. Reid used the strategy of taking a House bill, stripping out its contents making it a shell bill and then putting Obamacare into the bill. This is a circumvention, but it has been done before and has precedent.
We have entered a truly lawless phase of history.
Yep-— the mission is clear. Dump the Dems en masse come November and gay Boy Blunder! Scrooge the black robed tyrants unfaithful to the US Constitution! Their legacy is a smeared one for all of eternity.
I brought this point up in a thread yesterday:
How can a regulatory agency (HHS) grant waivers to a tax imposed by Congress (to follow the SCOTUS interpretation)?
The exemptions require immediate challenge. Could the Dept. of Agriculture begin granting waivers to personal income tax? Could the EPA begin granting waivers to capital gains taxes? If the mandate is in fact a tax, how can a govt agency grant waivers to said tax? Not even the IRS can do so - an act of Congress is required.
........For once, I was ahead on something!
Same way we have an ineligible POTUS. Same way the SCOTUS can rewrite cases and ignore the Constitution. Same way Congress can not do their sworn duty.
1. I suspect a negotiation over back taxes is somewhat different than one over interest and penalties, from a purely legal perspective.
2. I may be wrong about this, but my understanding is that these negotiations with the IRS over unpaid income taxes only involve individuals, not those filing corporate returns. This is an important distinction because any reduction in tax liability that the IRS negotiates is really predicated on a realistic assessment that it's pointless to hold a person responsible for a massive tax liability if there isn't a chance in hell that they'll ever pay it. A corporation, on the other hand, can be liquidated and its assets sold to pay a tax lien.
Cable Guy MN
Thanks for the Link.....I heard about it, I then asked the Question on Newsvine (JayTee) and it looks like FreeRepublic gets the answers....LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.