Flashermac Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 They'd probably charge you extra because you are still alive and could get sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 What is Germany's tax rate? The USA tax rate probably is higher. It was easy enough to look up. Germany is much higher due to the VAT. How can you compare apples with oranges? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 After 65 the USA healthcare system is crap. My parents still have to buy a policy to cover all the things that medicare doesn't cover. Then there are the doctors that refuse to deal with medicare, so you pay them cash or try to go to another doctor. By the time you reach 65, the US politicians will have sucked all the money from medicare, so you will get ziltch, IMO. I know of one person who checks the medicare website each year and picks the medicare plan that best suits him. He spends very little and gets relatively good medical care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 From what I understood the USA system was suppose to be similar. i.e. Person works in a restaurant: WHAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER O'BAMA CARE: Small restaurant without much profit or any profit at the end of the year. The employeers cost would be almost zero if not zero. Employee gets sick. The employee gets medical care and doesn't have to file bankruptcy. The insurance company is charged one of the smallest amounts for the service. Real world: Restaurant owner has to provide health insurance to all employees if he is over a certain number. (25 I think' date=' not sure.) Lowest quote came in at about $1.5k per person per year. At that level, if 30 people are employed, restaurant pays 45k off the bottom line for ins that it was not paying before. Result: If this is a small establishment, restaurant fires enough employees to be below the standard. One guy I know said he thought he might be able to do it and survive but was not willing risk it so he fired 10 people and became his own cleaning crew and host staff.[/quote'] REAL WORLD: Do you have insurance thru your employer? Don't you think others should get the same type of benefits? REAL WORLD: If an employer doesn't pay for the insurance he will get penalize. The last I knew the penalty is about 2.5%. Exactly what gets penalized I am not sure. If it the net profits of the business for the month, quarter or year, that could end up being a super bargain. I think people should actually find out what the rules will be then restructure the business to the rules. I got a feeling this might be a great deal for small business owners who can not afford insurance. They could end up with coverage and depending on how the rules can be manipulated, may come out further ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 Senate repeals part of health care law The Senate voted Wednesday for the first time to repeal a piece of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, rolling back a new tax reporting requirement that’s been universally panned by business owners. The amendment to repeal the 1099 reporting requirement passed 81-17 with broad bipartisan support. The Senate voted several times last year on repealing the requirement, but all the attempts failed amid partisan bickering over how to pay for it. Republicans made an attempt to repeal the provision by taking money from the health reform law’s prevention and wellness fund. Democrats tried to repeal it without paying for it. The provision would have required business owners to file 1099 tax documents on all cumulative purchases from a single vendor that total more than $600 in a year. It was included in the health law because it would have raised about $17 billion in previously uncollected taxes. A bipartisan collection of business groups have opposed the provision, arguing that it would bury them in paperwork. ... Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 Senate repeals part of health care law The Senate voted Wednesday for the first time to repeal a piece of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, rolling back a new tax reporting requirement that’s been universally panned by business owners. [color:red]The amendment to repeal the 1099 reporting requirement passed 81-17 with broad bipartisan support.[/color] The Senate voted several times last year on repealing the requirement, but all the attempts failed amid partisan bickering over how to pay for it. Republicans made an attempt to repeal the provision by taking money from the health reform law’s prevention and wellness fund. Democrats tried to repeal it without paying for it. The provision would have required business owners to file 1099 tax documents on all cumulative purchases from a single vendor that total more than $600 in a year. It was included in the health law because it would have raised about $17 billion in previously uncollected taxes. A bipartisan collection of business groups have opposed the provision, arguing that it would bury them in paperwork. ... Link Passing out 1099 to every vendor was one part of the health bill I really hated. Can you imagine passing out a 1099 to a Thai vendor? In order to give the Thai vendor a 1099 they would have to have a Federal Employee Identification Number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCorinthian Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 I think people should actually find out what the rules will be then restructure the business to the rules. I got a feeling this might be a great deal for small business owners who can not afford insurance. They could end up with coverage and depending on how the rules can be manipulated, may come out further ahead. Make no mistake, I am not debating the merits of any legislation, I am just pointing out what the effects of it have been that you apparently did not know about. Do I think people should have health insurance? Sure. Do I think the over all good is served by forcing small business to fire people to stay afloat and comply with the law? No. REAL WORLD: If an employer doesn't pay for the insurance he will get penalize. The last I knew the penalty is about 2.5%. BYW, that is wrong. The penalty is enforced coverage per employee. So for 10 about $45,000. Passing out 1099 to every vendor was one part of the health bill I really hated. Can you imagine passing out a 1099 to a Thai vendor? In order to give the Thai vendor a 1099 they would have to have a Federal Employee Identification Number. Huh? How do you not read these things? The 1099 is filled out by the owner!!! At "one every $600 vendor" would be a serious pain, but any good owner will have those records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allistar Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 (edited) So, would you support a law that de-couples one's health insurance from his job (and takes businesses out of the "I have to find the cheapest health insurance for my employees every year"), and has one rate offered to all customers? Otherwise, your statement (about supporting people having health insurance but not supporting a law that forces employers to fire employees over the new health law) is extremely contradictory. Edited February 3, 2011 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCorinthian Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 ...your statement (about supporting people having health insurance but not supporting a law that forces employers to fire employees over the new health law) is extremely contradictory. Not if you read the previous statements by me and others over the past say five pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allistar Posted February 3, 2011 Report Share Posted February 3, 2011 I guess that I'll leave this private discussion to the ones that have posted over the last five pages. By you and others, I assume you are referring to HH, who hasn't responded to my answer of his question by answering my question, which I don't expect he will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now