The IRS will hire 16,500 new agents to enforce health care
Original post made by jimf01, another community, on Apr 7, 2010
We do know that the legislation includes a new section 5000A to the IRC Subsection(a) of section 5000A would require that practically every American taxpayer obtain health insurance that qualifies as "minimum essential coverage."
This Business Week article gives strong clues to how this will work: Web Link
This article says that the IRS states they have not determined how many additional agents they would have to hire, so it is not a yes, but it is also not a no.
The article also says that "the agency will rely on insurance companies to provide information that individuals are buying coverage as required by the new health-care overhaul"
This means that like your W2, bank account interest 1099 and mortgage interest 1098, your health insurance payments will become additional paperwork you will need, adding more work (or cost) to getting your tax return completed.
And don't forget that little form, because just like a 1099, if you miss something, the IRS has already been notified by your insurance co what you have paid.
Or if they don't get notified, what you HAVE NOT paid.
That means the IRS computer will automatically flag you as a taxpayer who didn't pay for health insurance. Then they have you. If you do not clear this up to the satisfaction of the IRS, it starts with a letter, but they have the power to keep your refund or come and knock on your door to discuss your failure to file and or pay your tax.
That is why the IRS can say, truthfully, that "The health-care overhaul doesn't have criminal sanctions for non-compliance." Because they do not need it. You are now in IRS regulation area, and they have plenty of existing regulation and authority to come after you for failure to pay or file your tax return.
In Massachusetts, which passed a similar health care bill in 2006. To enforce the individual mandate, the MA Department of Revenue asks what kind of insurance you have, as well as details like whether their "sincerely held religious beliefs" are moving them to petition for an exemption from the requirement.
L.A. court decision has San Ramon ties with national implications
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 558 views