Senate Fails in Attempts to Repeal Health Law Provision on 1099 Tax

By and | November 30, 2010

  • November 30, 2010 at 12:59 pm
    Tar says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What a shocker, this lame duck Senate led by the chief thief himself Harry Reid cannot repeal the onerous 1099 provision of the Obamascare Health bill. Thanks to the voters CA, WA,DE,CT and OR who could have really given Americans change in Congress, we will have the same anti-capitalists, anti-Free Enterprise self absorbed representatives occupying the U.S. SEnate. Simple and needed repeals such as this 1099 bill should be a no brainer to remove. However it’s same den of thieves who passed this provision who refuse to remove it. What does that tell you?

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:22 am
    Tiresis says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Hey, Tar

    This move was an attempt to eliminate or reduce the “off the books” transactions that rob our governments at all levels of duly legal revenues. Every “cash” under the table trabnsaction robs you and me. I find it so inteesting that all those who want to repeal the healthcare law are also against anything that would enable the governments (at all levels) to collect the legally allowable taxes for SS, medicare, unemployment, etc. Just think…with increased compliance how much mmoney we would get.

    As a W-2 employee for over 40 years, I resent the underground cash economy. Until such time as you all tea baggers and GOPers want to start to end this cheating and robbery, don’t sound so holier than thou.

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:27 am
    Pitchforks & Torches says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Same song, second verse. This is the worst Congress in American history. They also don’t pay attention to election results. Lame ducks can run but they can’t hide. We will take note and vote them out if this isn’t reversed in January.

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:32 am
    Tar says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I know it’s hard to believe but there are some of us who are not TEABAGGERS, as you liberals like to slander. By the way the Baggers were quite effective this past election if you hadn’t noticed?
    Having said that, if we were concerned about those who rob those of us who are legal than why aren’t we talking about a national sales tax in lieu of an income tax? National sales tax would allow those illegal immigrants to pay their “fair share” as well.
    With regards to 1099, since you are just an employee Tiresis, than you would not understand the additional expense just a small business would incur having to produce additional 1099’s or the expense of having your CPA produce the forms. My business sends out 4 1099’s, under the new onerous rules I will send out over 57, from my leasing company to the Springs water company. NOw those forms got to the IRS, isn’t it comforting that taxpayers are going to pay for up to 16,000 more IRS agents? IRS agents who will monitor if individual citizens have a healthplan in effect and additional IRS agents to pore through the massive amounts of additional 1099’s sent in. Very comforting to know that government is getting bigger and taxpayers will continue funding the swelling of our government! and you still have a hardon over the Tea Party Activists?

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:49 am
    Mr. Solvent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Until you’re a business owner you have no clue about what you’re saying.

    If I use a lead provider and spend $1,000 purchasing their goods and services, I now have to issue a 1099…to my lead provider.

    Now that’s just one example. Take a look at what your employer buys and uses on a yearly basis. Can you imagine having to issue 1099’s to every single vendor that you spend over $600 with?

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:49 am
    Doctor J says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The only cheating and robbery I see is that of government. You really think enforcement is going to matter with the deficits and debt being run up, the mandates, the ‘adminisitration’?

    Tar runs a business and his points are valid. So, wanting less government meddling is somehow ‘cheating’?

    If I could opt out of Social Security today, I would. Why? Beacause the system is going broke, thanks to it being a political football. It’s a ponzi scheme sham, foisted on the American people by FDR. We should not be subjected to government “mercy” such as this any longer.

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:50 am
    1099 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Taxing 40% of my earned income under the guise of “social programs” is the true robbery.

    Explain how “we” get “more” with “increased compliance”? Spoken like a true statist. I’d rather take my chances keeping more with less government.

    Besides you need look no further than the democrat party to find “off the books” transactions. lol!

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:54 am
    smartypants says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Well we got the government we deserve, I guess. What did you expect, that they would be doing the people’s business? Don’t you know that the goal of this congress is to stop any legislation whatsoever, so that they can boast that Obama did nothing in his term of office. The goal, according to the puppet, McConnell (and he does look like one of those puppets in the Nutcracker, with the jowls), the goal is to ensure that Obama is a one term president; he says that should be the goal of the American people, and that is the agenda, regardless of the fact that the campaign was to “change” how government works. too bad the kids who voted for change, did not vote in the congressional elections and so the older voting cohort who got scared (again like with Cheyney) that the country was going to pot, they voted more against the democrats than for republicans. So don’t expect ANYTHING to happen, let alone change. And I am glad because the Bush tax cuts will expire and it will take more than another act of congress to reinstate them, what with the inertia that we have in Congress. So Mitch, go ahead and stay the course, what’s good for the republican party is supposed to be what is good for America, even if we don’t want that. Who does Mitch represent? why the good old party, NOT the American public. It ain’t hard to see the real agenda anymore.

  • November 30, 2010 at 1:59 am
    the doctor's patient says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    So you won’t be expecting a check when you retire, right? Many folks don’t really know the issue and are against socliaism but have no problem filing and waiting for their monthly check. And the same was for reducing the deficit, as long as someone else pays. I don’t believe you when you say things like that; easy to talk but harder to walk.

  • November 30, 2010 at 2:05 am
    1099 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Yeah because you can have a nice retirement on SS checks…

  • November 30, 2010 at 2:05 am
    Sarah says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This is the worst economic legislation I have ever seen. This is a major job killer.

    Lets look at who is affected.

    1. Medical profession. 12/01 20% reduction in medicare reimbursement to doctors. Doctors,Nurses, care givers will be laid off as a result.
    2. Any employer who has more than 50 employess will pay a fine for healthcare if they do not provide the coverage. So if an employer has 48 employees, whats the chance of them hiring another 10 employees? or whould they sub out the work overseas.
    3. Small business who employees low wage workers. They will be required to pay a fine for not offering benefits. They will raise their price or shut down operations.

    Unemployment will go above 12% in 1012 when this goes into effect. Why do you think they waited until 2012? maybe the presidential election had something to do with it or just maybe the they needed the extra 4 years of taxes to pay for this boondogle.

  • November 30, 2010 at 2:13 am
    Bradley says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What if the government decided to take the 1099 requirement to you personally?

    Each establishment or person you spend more than $600 per year. You must get a tax form from each and send to the government reporting the exact amount you spent.

    Includes restaurant, gardener, babysitter, hotel, grocery store, retail store, gas station, car repair, airline, telephone, cable, insurance company and on and on.

    Yes, that will fix those tax dodgers. Ha!

  • November 30, 2010 at 2:34 am
    Larry says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    That doesn’t make any sense. Tiresis is a person, not an LLC.

    I think that’s a bad analogy.

  • November 30, 2010 at 2:51 am
    Mr. Solvent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It’s not a bad analogy Larry. It puts it in terms that Tiresis can understand. Imagine having to 1099 your grocery store. Essentially that’s what small businesses are going to contend with if this provision isn’t repealed.

  • November 30, 2010 at 3:08 am
    Agency principal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I have expenses of over 1.3 million in my agency. office supplies, Insurance premiums, Etc. This includes many vendors. I really do not have the time to prepare a 1099 to every entity I wrote a check to over $600. for the year. I guess this is a feable attempt to improve the unemployment rate by making small business people hire someone to do these forms.

    This President is so over his head it isnt even funny.

  • November 30, 2010 at 3:22 am
    Bradley says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Thanks Mr. Solvent.

    My point was to show Tiresis the work required.

    From CNN
    ” Section 9006 of the health care bill — just a few lines buried in the 2,409-page document — mandates that beginning in 2012 all companies will have to issue 1099 tax forms not just to contract workers but to any individual or corporation from which they buy more than $600 in goods or services in a tax year.”

  • November 30, 2010 at 3:36 am
    Tar & Feathers & Rails says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I have a feeling that if this 1099 requirement is not repealed in January, there will be a big run on tar, feathers and rails to use on our Washington elite whose IQ’s are in the mid 50’s between imbeciles and idiots.

  • November 30, 2010 at 5:00 am
    Tiresis says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You can’t send out 1099’s due to the “time and expense” but I’ll betcha dollars to donuts you pick up every fraction of a cent when it comes to writing off your “expenses” that are also legitimate tax deductions for you.

    It is just SO much easier to blame the “freeloading” lazy asses that overspent for houses, didn’t save for the second greatest recession/depression in our modern hostiry, and blame those that grow old and need medical care…then to have to overexert yourselves to produce 1099’s. FOR SHAME.

    And yeah, I DID also own my own business. if this would have cut out the “underground economy” and made it easier to pick up all taxes owed and unemployment and social security and medicare payments due, I would have written these ouyt by hand.

    And anyway, most small businesses use software that can be updated to do this function…so you are all rife hypocrits. How many of you don’t declare cash payments?…or have family members that don’t? Why are the states cracking down on “subcontractors” vs. effective employees? I am totally tired of your whining. Just comly with the law and shut up already.

  • December 1, 2010 at 7:40 am
    nobody important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Certainly Tiresis, we will shut up and obey our masters. For a former business owner (failed business most likely) you are clueless on the work involved.

  • December 1, 2010 at 8:00 am
    TAR says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This has nothing to do with being Lazy windbags but everything to do with over regulation and insane cost increases. Cost increases that businesses do not need in an economy like we are experiencing today. We, in business, are looking to cut costs in order to REMAIN in business and keep our doors open and not every businessman or woman are thieves, nor as cynicle as you may be. Adding extra thousands in expenses in this economic times, not too mention the added cost to taxpayers for increasing the size of government is fiscally irresponsible. Obama’s been a fiscally responsible leader? Yeah right and the Pope’s polish?
    Oh well, gotta go to my Country Club for breakfast and bury the expense in “miscellaneous” expenses.

  • December 1, 2010 at 8:42 am
    Business Owner says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    As I see it, the whole bill is anti-business, job killing, over-regulating attempt by this administration to “spread the wealth” of this country by taking from the haves and giving to the have nots. Not exactly the way to promote prosperity for the country, is it? Our so called “leaders” have meetings to plan for the next meeting without doing anything to relieve small business. Everything is so politicized and the agendas rule the day instead of doing the right thing for the folks. We managed to get rid of many of these representatives in the last election, but the real turnover will be in 12 when we send this administration packing along with his minions in Congress.

  • December 1, 2010 at 10:38 am
    DLR says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    They say this is to make the underground ecomomy pay their fair share. HOW? Only the tax paying business will abide with this law. Me sending a 1099 to Office Max will not bring in more taxes, only increase government spending with the additional hires to take care of this paperwork nightmare.

  • December 1, 2010 at 10:58 am
    Anti Tiresis says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Tiresis,

    Let’s get this straight…..

    I currently send between 40 and 60 1099’s a year. I send them only to entities or persons who I paid over $600 a year.

    Tat covers all the indpendent contractors I use or anyone I pay cash to. So the only additional 1009’s I would send are to corporations who I already have their federal ID number for and are currently filing federal tax returns.

    How is sending 1099’s to the tax paying businesses going to increase tax revenue? Is the government going to reconcile that if a company says they did $10mil in business and they only received $9mil worth of 1099’s?

    Please explain to me how it is going to bring in additional tax revenue? If you are paying a vendor cash, you should still be 1099ing them prior to this taking effect.

    Enlighten me?

  • December 1, 2010 at 12:19 pm
    Sarah says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The purpose of this new requirment in the legislation is to give the 10,000 new employees of the IRS something to do. I can see them now, sitting there in a huge open room, all 10,000 ex-acorn nitwits matching 1099’s with tax returns.

    I am still trying to figure out what a saved or created job is.

  • December 1, 2010 at 1:08 am
    TAR says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You hit that squarely on the head!
    In addition, they need the IRS agents to go into our personal bank accounts to recoup fees. It just gives you a warm and fuzzy!

  • December 1, 2010 at 2:07 am
    Feathers says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Sarah, I like how you think. It is hard to understand doublespeak by this President. I watch what he does rather than what he says. His proclamation that he wants a pay freeze on federal employees that will save a whopping $2Bil is doublespeak since federal employees can still earn raises within their GS class and promotions. I don’t see him saying he wanted a freeze on hiring any more federal employees and the IRS is due to grow exponentially with the enforcers he is putting on the street. The only jobs he has created are the federal bureaucrats who will further control the population. This will put the boot on the neck of the people ala Chavez in Venezuela. Can’t wait until 12 when we send another message to him.

  • December 2, 2010 at 12:03 pm
    JB says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    We have gone from a nation of LAWS to a nation of RULES – back when this was a nation of LAWS, criminals were to be apprehended and punished, and if you were not a criminal you were free to pursue your dreams (subject to your Constitutional rights and constraints, of course…not too many pages to remember, a pretty good understanding of which is within the grasp of most of us)
    Alas, we have become a nation of RULES, wherein virtually any citizen may at any time find themselves subject to punishment for failure to abide by some contrived, usually arbitrary, and almost always very complex set of RULES, usually requiring the assistance of a Philadelphia lawyer to figure out if you’ve even violated anything at all (the IRS tax code or the 2,400+ page “healthcare” bill are two prime examples) It seems that we are no longer free citizens, but rather more like students in school who may at any time be sent to the principal’s office for discipline. And those who quite clearly and obviously should be expelled very rarely are. Sad.

  • December 3, 2010 at 10:55 am
    Feathers says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The laws don’t apply to our elitist leaders since they control the process. Tell me why Charlie Rangel is not going to jail for tax evasion. The same applies to Turbo Tax Tim. If we did something like they did, we would be in jail for it. Rangel gets a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again. Our government takes corruption to a new level.

  • December 3, 2010 at 11:02 am
    Tar says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Because according to Geraldo Rivera he has thought about the Rangel issue and Charlie just made a mistake. There were others who made more severe mistakes (like Timmy Geitner). Charlie is a good old guy according to Geraldo.
    I almost puked! Here’s a guy who served on the most powerful committee in the U.S. House – House Ways and Means Cmte and wrote laws that all of us peons, subordinate Americans must live under. But Charlie Rangel should not be held accountable for his actions? Give me a break. If anyone should be held to a higher standard is the guy who writes the damn laws and his peers in Congress!

  • December 3, 2010 at 11:41 am
    Feathers says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Geraldo is the voice of the left on Fox. I usually turn him off when I see them talk to him. He is so full of it, it makes me puke. Rangel should have been led away in handcuffs as soon as the House finished censuring him. Turbo Tax Tim should have been occupying a cell next to Madoff last year. Apparently, this is a nation of men, not laws and these elitist corrupt leftists are not subject to our laws.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*