A gal I know adopts a soldier at Christmas time. This year it is a woman serving in Iraq, whose husband is in San Diego with their 2 children. Last week while taking his children to school, his car was stopped, he and the kids were told to exit the car and sit on the curb. He was cited for Child Endangerment because he was smoking in the car. The Grandparents in Virginia are going to keep the kids until after his hearing with CPS in January.
The law (http://www.cdph.ca.gov/Pages/PH08-01.aspx) has been in effect since 2008, but he didn't know it existed, he is from Virginia. I know that's no excuse, but really!
Today the Surgeon General came out with the statement (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40576433/ns/health-addictions/) that One puff or whiff of second hand smoke could cause a heart attack.
I no longer smoke, and I do not disagree with the health hazards, but I am afraid of where this is going. Should my children have been taken from me because I smoked in their presence? Don't answer that.
Today in LA , they restricted Fast Food outlets (http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_16807992). When will there be a law that unhealthy food cannot be eaten outside your home or you can be accused of child endangerment for giving your child a french fry?
Sound ridiculous? Maybe....., but let's talk about it again in 20 years. Of course I'll be dead from COPD or heart disease because I smoked and have not eated wisely, but at least I had choices even if sometimes I made bad ones.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Friday, July 9, 2010
What? I need some imput about this! HR3590
I am one of those lucky people whose employer pays for part of my health insurance. I recently received an email that says that in 2011 employers will be required to show the value of what they pay for our health insurance to appear on our W2 tax form as part of our gross income. That requirement will also stand for retirees.
Here is the verbage:
" Title IX: Revenue Provisions - Subtitle A: Revenue Offset Provisions - (Sec. 9001, as modified by section 10901) Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose an excise tax of 40% of the excess benefit from certain high cost employer-sponsored health coverage. Deems any amount which exceeds payment of $8,500 for an employee self-only coverage plan and $23,000 for employees with other than self-only coverage (family plans) as an excess benefit. Increases such amounts for certain retirees and employees who are engaged in high-risk professions (e.g., law enforcement officers, emergency medical first responders, or longshore workers). Imposes a penalty on employers and coverage providers for failure to calculate the proper amount of an excess benefit.
(Sec. 9002) Requires employers to include in the W-2 form of each employee the aggregate cost of applicable employer-sponsored group health coverage that is excludable from the employee's gross income (excluding the value of contributions to flexible spending arrangements).
(Sec. 9003) Restricts payments from health savings accounts, medical savings accounts, and health flexible spending arrangements for medications to prescription drugs or insulin.
(Sec. 9004) Increases to 20% the penalty for distributions from a health savings account or Archer medical savings account not used for qualified medical expenses.
(Sec. 9005, as modified by section 10902) Limits annual salary reduction contributions by an employee to a health flexible spending arrangement under a cafeteria plan to $2,500. Allows an annual inflation adjustment to such amount after 2011.
(Sec. 9006) Expands reporting requirements for payments of $600 or more to corporations (other than tax-exempt corporations).
(Sec. 9007, as modified by section 10903) Requires tax-exempt charitable hospitals to: (1) conduct a community health needs assessment every two years; (2) adopt a written financial assistance policy for patients who require financial assistance for hospital care; and (3) refrain from taking extraordinary collection actions against a patient until the hospital has made reasonable efforts to determine whether the patient is eligible for financial assistance. Imposes a penalty tax on hospitals who fail to comply with the requirements of this Act.
Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress on information with respect to private tax-exempt, taxable, and government-owned hospitals regarding levels of charity care provided, bad debt expenses, unreimbursed costs, and costs for community benefit activities.
(Sec. 9008) Imposes an annual fee on the branded prescription drug sales exceeding $5 million of manufacturers and importers of such drugs beginning in 2010. Requires the HHS, VA, and DOD Secretaries to report to the Secretary of the Treasury on the total branded prescription drug sales within government programs within their departments.
(Sec. 9009, as modified by section 10904) Imposes an annual fee on the gross sales receipts exceeding $5 million of manufacturers and importers of certain medical devices beginning in 2011.
(Sec. 9010, as modified by section 10905) Imposes on any entity that provides health insurance for any United States health risk an annual fee beginning in 2011. Defines "United States health risk" as the health risk of an individual who is a U.S. citizen or resident or is located in the United States with respect to the period the individual is so located. Exempts entities whose net premiums written are not more than $25 million. Requires all entities subject to such fee to report to the Secretary of the Treasury on their net written premiums and imposes a penalty for failure to report.
(Sec. 9011) Requires the VA Secretary to study and report to Congress by December 31, 2012, on the effect of fees assessed by this Act on the cost of medical care provided to veterans and on veterans' access to medical devices and branded prescription drugs.
(Sec. 9012) Eliminates the tax deduction for expenses for determining the subsidy for employers who maintain prescription drug plans for Medicare Part D eligible retirees.
(Sec. 9013) Increases the adjusted gross income threshold for claiming the itemized deduction for medical expenses from 7.5% to 10% beginning after 2012. Retains the 7.5% threshold through 2016 for individual taxpayers who have attained age 65 before the close of an applicable taxable year.
(Sec. 9014) Imposes a limitation after December 31, 2012, of $500,000 on the deductibility of remuneration paid to officers, directors, employees, and service providers of health insurance issuers who derive at least 25% of their gross premiums from providing health insurance coverage that meets the minimum essential coverage requirements established by this Act.
(Sec. 9015, as modified by section 10906) Increases after December 31, 2012, the hospital insurance tax rate by .9% for individual taxpayers earning over $200,000 ($250,000 for married couples filing joint tax returns).
(Sec. 9016) Requires Blue Cross or Blue Shield organizations or other nonprofit organizations that provide health insurance to reimburse at least 85% of the cost of clinical services provided to their enrollees to be eligible for special tax benefits currently provided to such organizations.
Subtitle B: Other Provisions - (Sec. 9021) Excludes from gross income the value of certain health benefits provided to members of Indian tribes, including: (1) health services or benefits provided or purchased by IHS; (2) medical care provided by an Indian tribe or tribal organization to a member of an Indian tribe; (3) accident or health plan coverage provided by an Indian tribe or tribal organization for medical care to a member of an Indian tribe and dependents; and (4) any other medical care provided by an Indian tribe that supplements, replaces, or substitutes for federal programs."
Please, someone with more tax knowledge than I, tell me it isn't so.
And...................if it is, will the members of Congress and the Senate's W2's show what I pay for their healthcare as part of their gross income?
If this is true, then our esteemed president (note lower case) lied to us! Again! Remember he said no new taxes!
Here is the verbage:
" Title IX: Revenue Provisions - Subtitle A: Revenue Offset Provisions - (Sec. 9001, as modified by section 10901) Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose an excise tax of 40% of the excess benefit from certain high cost employer-sponsored health coverage. Deems any amount which exceeds payment of $8,500 for an employee self-only coverage plan and $23,000 for employees with other than self-only coverage (family plans) as an excess benefit. Increases such amounts for certain retirees and employees who are engaged in high-risk professions (e.g., law enforcement officers, emergency medical first responders, or longshore workers). Imposes a penalty on employers and coverage providers for failure to calculate the proper amount of an excess benefit.
(Sec. 9002) Requires employers to include in the W-2 form of each employee the aggregate cost of applicable employer-sponsored group health coverage that is excludable from the employee's gross income (excluding the value of contributions to flexible spending arrangements).
(Sec. 9003) Restricts payments from health savings accounts, medical savings accounts, and health flexible spending arrangements for medications to prescription drugs or insulin.
(Sec. 9004) Increases to 20% the penalty for distributions from a health savings account or Archer medical savings account not used for qualified medical expenses.
(Sec. 9005, as modified by section 10902) Limits annual salary reduction contributions by an employee to a health flexible spending arrangement under a cafeteria plan to $2,500. Allows an annual inflation adjustment to such amount after 2011.
(Sec. 9006) Expands reporting requirements for payments of $600 or more to corporations (other than tax-exempt corporations).
(Sec. 9007, as modified by section 10903) Requires tax-exempt charitable hospitals to: (1) conduct a community health needs assessment every two years; (2) adopt a written financial assistance policy for patients who require financial assistance for hospital care; and (3) refrain from taking extraordinary collection actions against a patient until the hospital has made reasonable efforts to determine whether the patient is eligible for financial assistance. Imposes a penalty tax on hospitals who fail to comply with the requirements of this Act.
Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress on information with respect to private tax-exempt, taxable, and government-owned hospitals regarding levels of charity care provided, bad debt expenses, unreimbursed costs, and costs for community benefit activities.
(Sec. 9008) Imposes an annual fee on the branded prescription drug sales exceeding $5 million of manufacturers and importers of such drugs beginning in 2010. Requires the HHS, VA, and DOD Secretaries to report to the Secretary of the Treasury on the total branded prescription drug sales within government programs within their departments.
(Sec. 9009, as modified by section 10904) Imposes an annual fee on the gross sales receipts exceeding $5 million of manufacturers and importers of certain medical devices beginning in 2011.
(Sec. 9010, as modified by section 10905) Imposes on any entity that provides health insurance for any United States health risk an annual fee beginning in 2011. Defines "United States health risk" as the health risk of an individual who is a U.S. citizen or resident or is located in the United States with respect to the period the individual is so located. Exempts entities whose net premiums written are not more than $25 million. Requires all entities subject to such fee to report to the Secretary of the Treasury on their net written premiums and imposes a penalty for failure to report.
(Sec. 9011) Requires the VA Secretary to study and report to Congress by December 31, 2012, on the effect of fees assessed by this Act on the cost of medical care provided to veterans and on veterans' access to medical devices and branded prescription drugs.
(Sec. 9012) Eliminates the tax deduction for expenses for determining the subsidy for employers who maintain prescription drug plans for Medicare Part D eligible retirees.
(Sec. 9013) Increases the adjusted gross income threshold for claiming the itemized deduction for medical expenses from 7.5% to 10% beginning after 2012. Retains the 7.5% threshold through 2016 for individual taxpayers who have attained age 65 before the close of an applicable taxable year.
(Sec. 9014) Imposes a limitation after December 31, 2012, of $500,000 on the deductibility of remuneration paid to officers, directors, employees, and service providers of health insurance issuers who derive at least 25% of their gross premiums from providing health insurance coverage that meets the minimum essential coverage requirements established by this Act.
(Sec. 9015, as modified by section 10906) Increases after December 31, 2012, the hospital insurance tax rate by .9% for individual taxpayers earning over $200,000 ($250,000 for married couples filing joint tax returns).
(Sec. 9016) Requires Blue Cross or Blue Shield organizations or other nonprofit organizations that provide health insurance to reimburse at least 85% of the cost of clinical services provided to their enrollees to be eligible for special tax benefits currently provided to such organizations.
Subtitle B: Other Provisions - (Sec. 9021) Excludes from gross income the value of certain health benefits provided to members of Indian tribes, including: (1) health services or benefits provided or purchased by IHS; (2) medical care provided by an Indian tribe or tribal organization to a member of an Indian tribe; (3) accident or health plan coverage provided by an Indian tribe or tribal organization for medical care to a member of an Indian tribe and dependents; and (4) any other medical care provided by an Indian tribe that supplements, replaces, or substitutes for federal programs."
Please, someone with more tax knowledge than I, tell me it isn't so.
And...................if it is, will the members of Congress and the Senate's W2's show what I pay for their healthcare as part of their gross income?
If this is true, then our esteemed president (note lower case) lied to us! Again! Remember he said no new taxes!
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Morgan Hills Unified School District American Flags on Cinco de Mayo
Here, Here! To Dr Wesley Smith, Superintendent of Schools in the Morgan Hills Unified School District!
It's good that there are still people out there with the courage of their convictions who will not buckle under to the ridiculous demands of the loud few.
http://news.yahoo.com/video/sanfranciscocbs5-15751300/s-bay-students-wearing-u-s-flag-shirts-sent-home-19586193
I'm sure he would not objection to latino students wearing a shirt with a Mexican or South American flag, as long as it is under the American flag.
When ships go into a foreign port, they put the flag of the country they are visiting ABOVE their home country flag out of respect for their host.
It would be nice to see that same respect from those visiting our country.
Just had to vent my spleen!
It's good that there are still people out there with the courage of their convictions who will not buckle under to the ridiculous demands of the loud few.
http://news.yahoo.com/video/sanfranciscocbs5-15751300/s-bay-students-wearing-u-s-flag-shirts-sent-home-19586193
I'm sure he would not objection to latino students wearing a shirt with a Mexican or South American flag, as long as it is under the American flag.
When ships go into a foreign port, they put the flag of the country they are visiting ABOVE their home country flag out of respect for their host.
It would be nice to see that same respect from those visiting our country.
Just had to vent my spleen!
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Arizona Bill on Illegal Aliens
I guess no one has read this bill.
All we hear on television and the radio, is how racist it is, and even the president is ignorant of the facts (he obviously hasn't read it either) and made an inane remark about people being stopped on the way to buy ice cream and asked for their "papers".
Why use an inflammatory term "papers" instead of identification (which is what it is) except to scare people into believing the authorities are some evil entity?
The law states very clearly that officers will ask for identification when making stops, however they are not to stop anyone without purpose.
What the heck is wrong with that? When I am stopped, I am asked for my drivers license. When I make a purchase, I am asked for my picture ID. When I make a hotel reservation, I am asked for picture ID. When I go to the doctor I am asked for my insurance card and a picture ID. When I try to enter my own country, I am asked for my passport. So what the heck is racist about that?
What is racist about requiring that those in this country be here legally?
What happened to the terms "Illegal Immigrant" or "Illegal Alien"? By removing the word "illegal" were we suppose to forget that that is what they are, illegal?
This country is great because of the immigrants who founded and tamed it. We still welcome immigrants who come here LEGALLY. Why would we only hear about the protests against the bill, instead of the 63% of Americans polled who support the bill?
I am tired of the propaganda and slanted media coverage.
I say enough!
All we hear on television and the radio, is how racist it is, and even the president is ignorant of the facts (he obviously hasn't read it either) and made an inane remark about people being stopped on the way to buy ice cream and asked for their "papers".
Why use an inflammatory term "papers" instead of identification (which is what it is) except to scare people into believing the authorities are some evil entity?
The law states very clearly that officers will ask for identification when making stops, however they are not to stop anyone without purpose.
What the heck is wrong with that? When I am stopped, I am asked for my drivers license. When I make a purchase, I am asked for my picture ID. When I make a hotel reservation, I am asked for picture ID. When I go to the doctor I am asked for my insurance card and a picture ID. When I try to enter my own country, I am asked for my passport. So what the heck is racist about that?
What is racist about requiring that those in this country be here legally?
What happened to the terms "Illegal Immigrant" or "Illegal Alien"? By removing the word "illegal" were we suppose to forget that that is what they are, illegal?
This country is great because of the immigrants who founded and tamed it. We still welcome immigrants who come here LEGALLY. Why would we only hear about the protests against the bill, instead of the 63% of Americans polled who support the bill?
I am tired of the propaganda and slanted media coverage.
I say enough!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)