“Does the administration have the authority to delay the employer mandate?”
Interesting article. A lot is unanswered and questions remain. Sections of the law clearly would present a scenario that deems this delay unwarranted, but then again, I’m not a lawyer and don’t work at the White House to fully know whether there is a viable loophole or not.
“New York University law professor Richard A. Epstein thinks that a larger problem will be to find someone with standing to sue against the delay. “It’s a very strange phenomenon in administrative law. If you imagine there’s a direct violation of statute, there should be a party who could sue,” Epstein said. “But doctrines of standing don’t allow that to happen easily for the non-enforcement of laws.” — I wonder if it makes any difference whether the employer mandate is considered a tax or a penalty. More work ahead for John Roberts!
I don’t believe that this temporary relief from the employer mandate will really reduce the administrative burden of the mandate on employers.
The tax liability still exists, even if it is not reported or paid. I expect that auditors will demand that companies nevertheless calculate the taxes due and report them as a liability on their balance sheets.
Furthermore, this arbitrary delay makes Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scoring of legislation even less credible. Just like nobody takes the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) calculation of the physician-fee schedule seriously, nobody will take the employer mandate seriously. And yet, politicians will still be bound to take into account budget neutrality as determined by a CBO required to incorporate another false assumption into its analysis.
“17 states are turning their (ObamaCare) risk pools over to the federal government.”
This was expected to happen. Wonder how the federal government expects to keep subsidizing these in the long-term.
As long as it can get away with it.
“Does the administration have the authority to delay the employer mandate?”
Interesting article. A lot is unanswered and questions remain. Sections of the law clearly would present a scenario that deems this delay unwarranted, but then again, I’m not a lawyer and don’t work at the White House to fully know whether there is a viable loophole or not.
There is no question that there are loopholes all over the law.
“New York University law professor Richard A. Epstein thinks that a larger problem will be to find someone with standing to sue against the delay. “It’s a very strange phenomenon in administrative law. If you imagine there’s a direct violation of statute, there should be a party who could sue,” Epstein said. “But doctrines of standing don’t allow that to happen easily for the non-enforcement of laws.” — I wonder if it makes any difference whether the employer mandate is considered a tax or a penalty. More work ahead for John Roberts!
The IRS power of the day link is full of things that will make you angry.
Everything from using your tax-dollars to fund “community-organizers” to just plain making you do things that you don’t want to do.
What do community organizers do?
Protest the things that you support.
Some funny pictures posted, though.
“There is a surge in part-time work. Is ObamaCare the reason?”
Certainly. Everyone has to get their workers under 30 hours to avoid that extra cost.
We’ll end up stratified work hours. If you are full-time, you’ll end up working 50+ hours, part-time only 29.
I don’t believe that this temporary relief from the employer mandate will really reduce the administrative burden of the mandate on employers.
The tax liability still exists, even if it is not reported or paid. I expect that auditors will demand that companies nevertheless calculate the taxes due and report them as a liability on their balance sheets.
Furthermore, this arbitrary delay makes Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scoring of legislation even less credible. Just like nobody takes the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) calculation of the physician-fee schedule seriously, nobody will take the employer mandate seriously. And yet, politicians will still be bound to take into account budget neutrality as determined by a CBO required to incorporate another false assumption into its analysis.