Obamacare Subsidies May Have to be Paid Back at Tax Time

Posted in the Columbus Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1 Aug 15, 2013
Sweet vindication. Cheers!

"When you apply for coverage in the Marketplace, it's important to double-check the information you put on your application. If the amount of your expected 2014 income you report isnít accurate, you may not get the right amount of savings. If you wind up making more money than you predicted on your application, you could have to pay back some or all of the savings youíve received. You would do this on your next tax return."

https://www.healthcare.gov/will-i-qualify-to-...

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#2 Aug 16, 2013
It's not really news that if you've earned more than you've predicted that you'll potentially have to pay back subsidies and tax benefits?

I would hope that this is a general tax issue most financially literate people understand, more than an issue linked to a specific subsidy?

Though, again, I'm slowly learning to never underestimate the failure of my peers to learn the basics.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#3 Aug 16, 2013
Wait what wrote:
Sweet vindication. Cheers!
"When you apply for coverage in the Marketplace, it's important to double-check the information you put on your application. If the amount of your expected 2014 income you report isnít accurate, you may not get the right amount of savings. If you wind up making more money than you predicted on your application, you could have to pay back some or all of the savings youíve received. You would do this on your next tax return."
https://www.healthcare.gov/will-i-qualify-to-...
How horrible. People who don't qualify for a subsidy but get it anyway have to pay it back. What is this nation coming to?
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#5 Aug 16, 2013
Neither of you are very smart.

The government is saying that folks who make under 400% of the federal poverty level will get subsidies. What they are not making clear is that if you work a job in which you are required to work without the option to decline - extra days - this may affect your subsidies causing you to have to pay back said subsidies at tax time and, in fact, may make your health insurance UNaffordable. All that OT will only go to paying back the government, putting you back to square one.

Have a nice day.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#6 Aug 16, 2013
Wait what wrote:
Neither of you are very smart.
The government is saying that folks who make under 400% of the federal poverty level will get subsidies. What they are not making clear is that if you work a job in which you are required to work without the option to decline - extra days - this may affect your subsidies causing you to have to pay back said subsidies at tax time and, in fact, may make your health insurance UNaffordable. All that OT will only go to paying back the government, putting you back to square one.
Have a nice day.
You sound like a socialist or something. You think people shouldn't have to pay if they can afford it?
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#7 Aug 16, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You sound like a socialist or something. You think people shouldn't have to pay if they can afford it?
I think the New Democrats seriously misled people, and I think that's wrong. This will stop people from getting a second job to help out with some unexpected expenses (as one example).

Out of everyone here, you're here the most. Do you have nothing better to do with your life?

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#8 Aug 17, 2013
Seriously?

You really think that people aren't generally aware that if they make more than forecasted that they may have to pay back tax benefits and subsidies?

Changing earnings are going to change your tax landscape. This isn't news, nor is it unique to healthcare subsidies.

If you're advocating for a more complete system of benefits that would not be tied to taxes and thus exempt from changing with income, I can see a bit of where you might be coming from, though you've phrased your point spectacularly poorly.

If you're actually indeed complaining that this income based subsidy changes with real earned income, I fear that I may not have the patience, energy or time to help explain the basic financial concepts at play here.
Big Johnson

Columbus, OH

#9 Aug 17, 2013
Wait what wrote:
Sweet vindication. Cheers!
"When you apply for coverage in the Marketplace, it's important to double-check the information you put on your application. If the amount of your expected 2014 income you report isnít accurate, you may not get the right amount of savings. If you wind up making more money than you predicted on your application, you could have to pay back some or all of the savings youíve received. You would do this on your next tax return."
https://www.healthcare.gov/will-i-qualify-to-...
Another way to do things would be to make the subsidy a tax credit which is applied the year after you pay for the insurance. That way no one has to repay any money if their income increases, and no one will have the money when they need it in the first place. Would that work better for you?

Anyway what is all this crazy talk about people having to repay welfare - which the subsidy is - if it turns out they make too much money to qualify? You libs must think money grows on trees!
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#10 Aug 17, 2013
Big Johnson wrote:
<quoted text>
Another way to do things would be to make the subsidy a tax credit which is applied the year after you pay for the insurance. That way no one has to repay any money if their income increases, and no one will have the money when they need it in the first place. Would that work better for you?
Anyway what is all this crazy talk about people having to repay welfare - which the subsidy is - if it turns out they make too much money to qualify? You libs must think money grows on trees!
Actually, money grows in the ground, from flax and cotton:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/moolah/anatomypa...

woof
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#11 Aug 17, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
Seriously?
You really think that people aren't generally aware that if they make more than forecasted that they may have to pay back tax benefits and subsidies?
Changing earnings are going to change your tax landscape. This isn't news, nor is it unique to healthcare subsidies.
If you're advocating for a more complete system of benefits that would not be tied to taxes and thus exempt from changing with income, I can see a bit of where you might be coming from, though you've phrased your point spectacularly poorly.
If you're actually indeed complaining that this income based subsidy changes with real earned income, I fear that I may not have the patience, energy or time to help explain the basic financial concepts at play here.
It was not properly explained and will cause a problem when those generous tax refunds disappear because you got married, took a second job to help out with Christmas, went gambling and won some money, etc. Even now, doing a quick search, the subsidies are noted as tax credits - which most Americans assume are the same tax credits you get for having dependents, as an example, and ones that don't need to be paid back.

That you turn the government's disingenuous presentations into a personal attack is quite indicative of your intention to post here. It's not for informational purposes. You must be a trip to be around with your constant need to lecture people, no matter the subject. I can only imagine if you are in a relationship, clearly you wear the pants in the family.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#12 Aug 17, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
Seriously?
You really think that people aren't generally aware that if they make more than forecasted that they may have to pay back tax benefits and subsidies?
Changing earnings are going to change your tax landscape. This isn't news, nor is it unique to healthcare subsidies.
If you're advocating for a more complete system of benefits that would not be tied to taxes and thus exempt from changing with income, I can see a bit of where you might be coming from, though you've phrased your point spectacularly poorly.
If you're actually indeed complaining that this income based subsidy changes with real earned income, I fear that I may not have the patience, energy or time to help explain the basic financial concepts at play here.
And one other thing you don't seem to get: If you are trying to get back on your feet after a difficult year, coming up with $1500 all at once to pay back an advance tax subsidy for something the government told you was mandatory, well, it might as well be $15 million. And the IRS isn't exactly known for waiting until it's more convenient for you to get their money.

You must be very privileged, as evidenced by your world travels. People here who have medical bills generally can't afford to travel from coast to coast, let alone worldwide. You should be counting your blessings instead of slamming others.
Big Johnson

Columbus, OH

#13 Aug 17, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
And one other thing you don't seem to get: If you are trying to get back on your feet after a difficult year, coming up with $1500 all at once to pay back an advance tax subsidy for something the government told you was mandatory, well, it might as well be $15 million. And the IRS isn't exactly known for waiting until it's more convenient for you to get their money.
You must be very privileged, as evidenced by your world travels. People here who have medical bills generally can't afford to travel from coast to coast, let alone worldwide. You should be counting your blessings instead of slamming others.
Quite clearly you will never have to repay a subsidy because you prefer to wallow in self-pity rather than make the effort to pay your own way in life.

And look at the limits; almost $46,000 for a single person. A person making over $46,000 a year should be able to handle repaying $1500, especially as it does not need to be raised 'all at once'. You should know by late in the year if you will exceed the limit of eligibility, and then you have until April 15 to come up with the cash. You are projecting your own fiscal ineptitude here.
Big Johnson

Columbus, OH

#14 Aug 17, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
And one other thing you don't seem to get: If you are trying to get back on your feet after a difficult year, coming up with $1500 all at once to pay back an advance tax subsidy for something the government told you was mandatory, well, it might as well be $15 million. And the IRS isn't exactly known for waiting until it's more convenient for you to get their money.
You must be very privileged, as evidenced by your world travels. People here who have medical bills generally can't afford to travel from coast to coast, let alone worldwide. You should be counting your blessings instead of slamming others.
And what about if people make less than anticipated and get to take a larger tax credit as a result. Is that ok with you?
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#15 Aug 17, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the New Democrats seriously misled people, and I think that's wrong. This will stop people from getting a second job to help out with some unexpected expenses (as one example).
Out of everyone here, you're here the most. Do you have nothing better to do with your life?
The day anyone, ANYONE, is here more than Nate the Neoconservative is the day pigs fly.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#16 Aug 17, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
The day anyone, ANYONE, is here more than Nate the Neoconservative is the day pigs fly.
Actually, he seems to have disappeared for a few hours. Maybe he's busy investigating that White House Boston Bomber connection Glenn Beck told him about. Or stalking Justice Kennedy.

woof

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#17 Aug 17, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
It was not properly explained and will cause a problem when those generous tax refunds disappear because you got married, took a second job to help out with Christmas, went gambling and won some money, etc. Even now, doing a quick search, the subsidies are noted as tax credits - which most Americans assume are the same tax credits you get for having dependents, as an example, and ones that don't need to be paid back.
That you turn the government's disingenuous presentations into a personal attack is quite indicative of your intention to post here. It's not for informational purposes. You must be a trip to be around with your constant need to lecture people, no matter the subject. I can only imagine if you are in a relationship, clearly you wear the pants in the family.
I feel that your own inability to process the financial concepts at play here may have led to you unfairly underestimating the ability of our peers to understand the problem posed.

The subsidy is for people who qualify through their level of earned income. If their earned income changes, they may no longer be eligible for that subsidy and may have to pay it back.

This isn't really a high level concept, nor again is it unique to this program. Even with the histronics demonstrated in this thread, I'm confident most Americans will be able to understand this fairly basic idea.
mike

Akron, OH

#18 Aug 17, 2013
unless the subsidy is 500 dollars a month for a single person - no one will be able to afford insurance anyways.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#19 Aug 17, 2013
Big Johnson wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite clearly you will never have to repay a subsidy because you prefer to wallow in self-pity rather than make the effort to pay your own way in life.
And look at the limits; almost $46,000 for a single person. A person making over $46,000 a year should be able to handle repaying $1500, especially as it does not need to be raised 'all at once'. You should know by late in the year if you will exceed the limit of eligibility, and then you have until April 15 to come up with the cash. You are projecting your own fiscal ineptitude here.
I don't qualify for a subsidy.

A person making $46K, no dependents, no tax deductions, has extra? Get cancer with no deductions, and get back to me on that.

And yes, it does need to be raised all at once if you're figuring your taxes on March 30th and realize that Uncle Sam wants his money on April 15th.

As to my "fiscal ineptitude", that's a crock and you know it. Moreover, the subsidies as well as the approval process STILL have not been fully explained to the American public. I'll bet if you find those who have been interviewed with the Dispatch they have no idea that they could be in a predicament next year. These are folks who, for example, have been without insurance for 27 years which means they lacked the fortitude to find a job which did offer medical insurance.

So blast me on my "fiscal ineptitude" if you must, but I have paid a high price for making sure I was adequately covered for many years and not uninsured (which means I didn't expect any of you to help me out).

Now, find me the articles which explain in depth that people who will be receiving the subsidies understand that ANY change of a rise in income could cause a problem for them. You will have a hard time doing so.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#20 Aug 17, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
The subsidy is for people who qualify through their level of earned income. If their earned income changes, they may no longer be eligible for that subsidy and may have to pay it back.
No shyte, Sherlock. It's what I've been saying for a long time, and what people told me I was wrong about. None of the recent articles touting the benefits of these subsidies mention the details, and something which is subsidized generally doesn't have to be paid back. The government was disingenuous in how they presented this to the American people, which is why I posted to begin with.

Stop fearing. It's annoying.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#21 Aug 17, 2013
tranpsosition wrote:
Seriously?
You really think that people aren't generally aware that if they make more than forecasted that they may have to pay back tax benefits and subsidies?
Changing earnings are going to change your tax landscape. This isn't news, nor is it unique to healthcare subsidies.
If you're advocating for a more complete system of benefits that would not be tied to taxes and thus exempt from changing with income, I can see a bit of where you might be coming from, though you've phrased your point spectacularly poorly.
If you're actually indeed complaining that this income based subsidy changes with real earned income, I fear that I may not have the patience, energy or time to help explain the basic financial concepts at play here.
I know they aren't, thanks to a certain tax professional who is working with lower-income folks. They did not understand how this worked at all. It's not what they voted for, it's not what they expected, and it's not how it was presented by Obama. And you know what? Many of those folks who thought they were going to have coverage aren't sure they will be signing up after all, because they don't want the IRS in their business.

I hate duplicity, especially by this administration who swore to be so transparent. How you turned that into a lack of fiscal understanding is beyond me.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Merry Christmas! What's your favorite memory? 7 min Big Papa Tea 215
Topix gets rid of Canton and Twinsburg posters!!! 13 min Big Papa Tea 12
Will Cosby Be Charged With Hate Crimes For Drug... 15 min They cannot kill ... 13
Franklin County water-sewer bills rising 3% 21 min I Do Know 2
Coleman endorses Ginther for mayor 30 min They cannot kill ... 4
CIA Torture Report Comes Out Tomorrow 34 min Reality Speaks 266
chanukah hanukkah day 2 1 hr They cannot kill ... 4
Columbus Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 2:54 pm PST

NBC Sports 2:54PM
Manziel says Browns were "a little off" on Sunday
NBC Sports 3:31 PM
Cam Newton practices for first time since car accident
Bleacher Report 4:00 PM
Breaking Down Cleveland's Game Plan vs. Carolina
Bleacher Report 5:47 PM
Denver Broncos vs. Cincinnati Bengals Betting Odds, Analysis, NFL Pick
Bleacher Report 6:00 AM
Browns Should Sign/Draft Topflight Pass-Catcher for Johnny