Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It was part of the 2003 bill so not really fraud.
More like cost sharing between corp and gov.
3500 companies are doing this and all under a passed bill.
Cost sharing would be the subsidy part alone.
I know this was part of the 2003 bill, yes it was legal, which is why I said that its basically legalized Accounting Fraud. No one else is able to write off expenses that was not their own as their own, big business should have never been able to do that either.
I know this was part of the 2003 bill, yes it was legal, which is why I said that its basically legalized Accounting Fraud. No one else is able to write off expenses that was not their own as their own, big business should have never been able to do that either.
By all means... let's put a stop to that so the government can hurry up and pay $1,209 per senior for prescription coverage instead of $655. What are we waiting for? The more government spending the BETTER!
I know this was part of the 2003 bill, yes it was legal, which is why I said that its basically legalized Accounting Fraud. No one else is able to write off expenses that was not their own as their own, big business should have never been able to do that either.
What do you mean "not their own as their own"?
The corp. were covering the cost of a benefit to their retirees, saving the government money in the process and helping their employees as well.
You can be sure, they will probably dump that benefit now for those retirees.
Obamacare - doing exactly what the radical leftists intended it to do.
The corp. were covering the cost of a benefit to their retirees, saving the government money in the process and helping their employees as well.
You can be sure, they will probably dump that benefit now for those retirees.
Obamacare - doing exactly what the radical leftists intended it to do.
Meaning they were writing off government expenses in the same way they would write off their own expenses.
The subsidy was 28%, so for every $1,000 benefits that were provided, the company would pay $720, the government would pay $280. Instead of writing off the $720 that they actually spent, the company was able to write off the full $1,000, even though $280 of it was government $$$ and expenses, and not the companies expense.
Of course... all 3500 masters should dictate the direction of the people's welfare.
"Masters"? "People's Welfare"?
Einstein, are you employed? What do you suppose all these people who are employed by these corporations should do when they lose thier jobs as a result of Obama care? Come to you for a job? How many people do you employ?
Obama care-
1. Increases unemployment by forcing buisness to lay off existing employees and avoid new hires due to new and increased expenses\
2. forces buisness to relocate overseas to avoid increased new expenses
3. puts 30 million illegal immigrants on welfare roles. The only "people's welfare" that has been improved may be the citizens of Mexico
4. Puts additional strain on a burdened healthcare provider system, in which no physicians will see new Medicaid patients under these plans
5. Adds tremendous financial burdens to states that they cannot afford, forcing reductions in education, roads, and police force, thus worsening the living standards for the MAJORITY of Americans
6. Subverts the Constitution through a federal mandate to purchase a product that many do not want.
Meaning they were writing off government expenses in the same way they would write off their own expenses.
The subsidy was 28%, so for every $1,000 benefits that were provided, the company would pay $720, the government would pay $280. Instead of writing off the $720 that they actually spent, the company was able to write off the full $1,000, even though $280 of it was government $$$ and expenses, and not the companies expense.
I can understand the logic behind closing this loophole. What I can't understand is the defensive posture taken by Waxman et. al, when these corporations announce (as they're required by the SEC to do) the expected financial impact.
I think you will find more and more companies coming forward to tell the truth. The Dems can't handle the truth. Let them call every US company to testify. It's going to take a long time.
It's less about testifying and more about strong arming these corps and shutting them up because they dare follow the law and then publicize the results. These CEOs will be smeared and who knows? Maybe the great dictator will take those businesses over as well. Waxman will simply look like an idiot. He should wisely invest his time in a nose job, so we don't have to look at his pig snout.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
