Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: New Reporting Requirments in Health Care Bill

  1. #1

    Thumbs down New Reporting Requirments in Health Care Bill

    http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2010/...o-health-bill/


    Most people know about the individual mandate in the new health care bill, but the bill contained another mandate that could be far more costly.

    A few wording changes to the tax code’s section 6041 regarding 1099 reporting were slipped into the 2000-page health legislation. The changes will force millions of businesses to issue hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of additional IRS Form 1099s every year. It appears to be a costly, anti-business nightmare.

    Under current law, businesses are required to issue 1099s in a limited set of situations, such as when paying outside consultants. The health care bill includes a vast expansion in this information reporting requirement in an attempt to raise revenue for an increasingly rapacious Congress.

    In a recent summary, tax information firm RIA notes the types of transactions covered by the new 1099 rules:

    The 2010 Health Care Act adds “amounts in consideration for property” (Code Sec. 6041(a) as amended by 2010 Health Care Act §9006(b)(1)) and “gross proceeds” (Code Sec. 6041(a) as amended by 2010 Health Care Act §9006(b)(2)) to the pre-2010 Health Care Act categories of payments for which an information return to IRS will be required if the $600 aggregate payment threshold is met in a tax year for any one payee. Thus, Congress says that for payments made after 2011, the term “payments” includes gross proceeds paid in consideration for property or services.

    Basically, businesses will have to issue 1099s whenever they do more than $600 of business with another entity in a year. For the $14 trillion U.S. economy, that’s a hell of a lot of 1099s. When a business buys a $1,000 used car, it will have to gather information on the seller and mail 1099s to the seller and the IRS. When a small shop owner pays her rent, she will have to send a 1099 to the landlord and IRS. Recipients of the vast flood of these forms will have to match them with existing accounting records. There will be huge numbers of errors and mismatches, which will probably generate many costly battles with the IRS.

    Tax CPA Chris Hesse of LeMaster Daniels tells me:

    Under the health legislation, the IRS could be receiving billions of more documents. Under current law, businesses send Forms 1099 for payments of rent, interest, dividends, and non-employee services when such payments are to entities other than corporations. Under the new law, businesses will be required to send a 1099 to other businesses for virtually all purchases. And for the first time, 1099s are to be sent to corporations. This is a huge new imposition on American business, costing the private economy much more than any additional tax that the IRS might collect as a result.

    There appears to have been little discussion before this damaging mandate was slipped into the health bill and rammed through Congress, but a few business groups did raise concerns. Here’s what the Air Conditioner Contractors of America said:

    The House bill would extend the Form 1099 filing requirement to ALL vendors (including corporate) to which they pay more than $600 annually for services or property. Consider all the payments a small business makes in the course of business, paying for things such as computers, software, office supplies, and fuel to services, including janitorial services, coffee services, and package delivery services.

    In order to file all these 1099s, you’ll need to collect the necessary information from all your service providers. In order to comply with the law, you would have to get a Taxpayer Information Number or TIN from the business. If the vendor does not supply you with a TIN, you are obligated to withhold on your payments.

    Private transactions are the core of a market economy, and the source of America’s growth and prosperity. Now the federal government is imposing a vast new web of red tape on perhaps billions of these growth-generating private exchanges.

    For what purpose? So the spendthrift Congress can shake a few extra bucks out of private industry? The business sector is the generator of America’s high living standards, but most federal legislators just see it as a kitty to be raided or a cow to be milked dry.

    I’m stunned that there wasn’t a broader debate before such a costly mandate was enacted. If it goes into effect, it will waste vast quantities of human effort in filling out forms, reworking computer systems, collecting and organizing data, and fighting the IRS. The struggling American economy can’t afford anymore suffocating tax regulations. This mandate is a giant deadweight loss. It should be repealed.

    *************************

    Weee it just keeps getting better and better.

  2. #2
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423


    Sounds like good news to me... gonna be a lot easier to get your corporate overlords to pay you under the table... and before you know it, paying taxes will be a thing of the past.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  3. #3
    This kind of lunacy doesn't seem possible. I mean, there's not even any possible partisan/ideological justification.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    This kind of lunacy doesn't seem possible. I mean, there's not even any possible partisan/ideological justification.
    The justification is to ensure each business is paying their taxes, this will in theory make it more difficult to overstate/understate revenues and expenses. Of course does the IRS bureaucrat care that this is going to cost businesses a lot of money and a lot of wasted effort to do all these forms? Of course not.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    12,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    This kind of lunacy doesn't seem possible. I mean, there's not even any possible partisan/ideological justification.
    You should consider yourself lucky if this is the only unforeseen consequence. Every major overhaul of legislation has this kind of fuck up hidden somewhere in the dots and comma's. That's why every big law is followed by a second law to fix the mistakes made in the first one.
    Congratulations America

  6. #6
    De Oppresso Liber CitizenCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Bottom of a bottle, on top of a woman
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    This kind of lunacy doesn't seem possible. I mean, there's not even any possible partisan/ideological justification.
    Sure there is. It's been the same with every big piece of legislation. Like that link I posted to the $169 billion dollars spent on "compliance" with Medicare. Same deal with HIPPA, Sarb-Ox and any notable piece of legislation since... forever.

    The government just doesn't give a fuck, because they don't have to pick up the bill. And, FWIW, big corporations love it, because it helps give them a competitive advantage over smaller firms and startups, and adds a large, expensive new barrier to entry to help protect their market share.
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    -- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.

  7. #7
    At least we know accountants and lawyers will never be out of a job.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    At least we know accountants and lawyers will never be out of a job.
    Reported for anti-Semitism
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  9. #9
    Really? Some language in the health care bill changes every transaction over $600 in the entire US economy?

    I'm skeptical, especially given that the Cato agenda is to attack anything big government. So I smell a potential "look how awful the health care bill is" smear job.

  10. #10
    You can always read text of the entire bill yourself...

  11. #11
    Or you could point him to the relevant sections.
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  12. #12
    The 2010 Health Care Act adds “amounts in consideration for property” (Code Sec. 6041(a) as amended by 2010 Health Care Act §9006(b)(1)) and “gross proceeds” (Code Sec. 6041(a) as amended by 2010 Health Care Act §9006(b)(2)) to the pre-2010 Health Care Act categories of payments for which an information return to IRS will be required if the $600 aggregate payment threshold is met in a tax year for any one payee. Thus, Congress says that for payments made after 2011, the term “payments” includes gross proceeds paid in consideration for property or services.

  13. #13
    ... of the health care bill.
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    12,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
    ... of the health care bill.
    Oh, hadn't considered that one yet Could be one of those jobs like how they claimed this bill was going to put a ban on owning a gun in the US.
    Congratulations America

  15. #15
    One reason I can believe this is because the bill was written by a host of different committees. In short, it's technically a hybrid of a tax/commerce bill that happens to impact healthcare.

    This is because we don't have a legislative committee that can start legislation on socialized health care. It's also sort of one of the reasons some people think our bill violates the constitution.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    12,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    One reason I can believe this is because the bill was written by a host of different committees. In short, it's technically a hybrid of a tax/commerce bill that happens to impact healthcare.

    This is because we don't have a legislative committee that can start legislation on socialized health care. It's also sort of one of the reasons some people think our bill violates the constitution.
    The US isn't unique in that way. I remember a situation where they were overhauling unemployment benefits overhere in Holland. In an attempt to limit benefits for a specific group they managed to write the rules in such a way that these people could actually double their benefits. When I pointed this out to our contacts at the ministry they explained to me that separate people were dealing with separate articles and that there really wasn't a coordinator.
    Congratulations America

  17. #17
    None of which justifies wild stories. Sure, theoretically it may have something crazy. Any bill might, eh? But I don't start tearing my hair out just because some guy at Cato says so.

  18. #18
    They point to the relevant sections of the bill. You are just lazy.

  19. #19
    Have you checked?
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    They point to the relevant sections of the bill.
    Au contraire. They a) point to the relevant section of the bill, and b) interpret it in a Chicken Little-type manner. It's the interpretation that I question. Do I think they are wrong? Not necessarily, nor do I feel qualified to judge legislatorese. But since it hasn't been picked up by other media lacking the extreme and specific agenda of Cato, I might add-, I smell scare-mongering. Given that current media are desperate for sensationalist ratings, they'd snap this up in a heartbeat if it held water.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •