Skip to main content

View Diary: ObamaCare is a Republican Disaster (75 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  An email I just got from the bank (11+ / 0-)

    (I have about 2k left in an IRA I've been draining down to finish up my BSN, because I was foolish enough to believe all the political rhetoric about how education was the key to getting a job.)

       
    Get Ready for the New 3.8% Tax on Investment Income

    The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 established a new 3.8% Medicare tax on investment income for high-income taxpayers, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2013. The tax will also apply to trusts and estates, and the income threshold that triggers the tax for them is low. These taxes can take a bite out of the legacy you may be trying to build for your loved ones. Read more.

    So the bank is pushing an OMG, Obamacare is going to steal the money you were going to leave to your kids and grandkids! line.  Happy happy, joy joy.
    •  Hmm, sure sounds like scare-mongering. (5+ / 0-)

      Which is it-

      investment income for high-income taxpayers
      or
      the income threshold that triggers the tax for them is low
      Not surprising that they don't define "high" and "low".

      Oh for crying out loud!

      by 4mygirls on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 07:50:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  low threshold for the rich (3+ / 0-)

        Remember the complaints that it was impossible to raise a family on only $300k a year? That's their "low".

        The tax is real, though; it's a "raise the cap" tax. And it's a test for the theory that raising the SS cap will diminish support for SS. If Medicare/Medicaid is still supported, raising the SS cap is a better and better idea.

        I'd imagine rich investors might change their investments. So it is the sort of thing a rich investor should know about.

      •  but they forgot this; (4+ / 0-)

        the vast majority of those receiving that email won't get the OMG 3.8% tax because they don't have the 'low threshold' of a quarter of a million dollars in annual investment income.
        Of the minority that DO get a pinch, it will be a 3.8% pinch on only the investment income over the threshold.
        Unless you make a million a year in investments (Hi Mitt! how's the dog?) the increase will be pretty small compared to the dry cleaning bill.
        Unearned money = $250k; tax hit = zero.
        Unearned money = $500k; tax hit < $10k.
        Unearned money = $1million; tax hit < $30k.
        Wages = $1million; tax hit = zero.
        These numbers assume zero tax dodges and payment of the full percentage.
        How much does it cost to get blood and/or cocaine out of a $1000 suit? Cuz I really wouldn't know.

        So best case, everyone forgets all about it, worst case (for that asshole bank) is a lot of people realize their bank is engaging in fearmongering political propaganda, and invest elsewhere.
        It was the mindless dominance of short term thinking that aligned the Right against Obamacare, and it is now blowing up in their smug faces. They have learned nothing, because this bank is doing the exact same thing.

        Last full month in which the average daily temperature did not exceed twentieth-century norms: 2/1985 - Harper's Index, 2/2013

        by kamarvt on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 10:08:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  They're talking too different things in those (0+ / 0-)

        two lines.  The first is for individuals, the second for trusts.  Tax rules and rates vary dramatically for the two groups, with trust having no exemption amount, etc.  

        My issue is more with the idea that the money people are using to build up a "legacy" shouldn't be taxed, but the money people are using to buy food and take care of their kids should be.  Or rather, those who only have the money to buy food and take care of their kids should be taxed at a higher rate so those who are building up a legacy can not be taxed at all.

    •  That tax is Threshold Dependent (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MRA NY, gustynpip

      Indivicuals making $200K, married couples making #250K ONLY will be subject to the tax:

      This group will also pay a 3.8% unearned income tax on interest, dividends, annuities, royalties, rents, and gains on the sale of investments over the threshold.

      Taxable income under the $200/$250k threshold is subject to the same benefits and tax cuts as those who make under the threshold.

      Obama Care Facts

      Readers & Book Lovers Pull up a chair! You're never too old to be a Meta Groupie

      by Limelite on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 07:54:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Do you mind sharing what bank? (0+ / 0-)

      I want to make sure they don't get to keep any of my family's money.

      No, you can't fix stupid. You OUTNUMBER stupid. -Wildthumb, 1/10/2013

      by newinfluence on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 10:16:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  NP. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        newinfluence

        5th 3rd.

        They used to have most of my banking.  Over the course of becoming unemployed and going back to school, I've basically erased what I had in IRAs.  They still hold my mortgage, with another 25k or so to go on that for which I keep a checking account from which my mortgage payments are automatically swept each month, but it's used for nothing else now.  Everything else runs through a credit union now.

        •  Thanks. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blue in NC

          I haven't received that letter, but I will be closing my (admittedly very small) checking account that I have kept through them. I might even send them a letter letting them know exactly why. :-)

          No, you can't fix stupid. You OUTNUMBER stupid. -Wildthumb, 1/10/2013

          by newinfluence on Mon Aug 26, 2013 at 03:02:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think I got it because I had the IRAs, which are (0+ / 0-)

            counted as 'securities', and are their own special subdivision within the company or something.  If I only had my mortgage and checking accounts there, I doubt I would have gotten it either.  But it's simpler to spam mail everyone with securities than to actually pay attention and say 'Hey, this guy's got 2k, he's obviously not going to be hit with this tax'.

          •  If you close accounts - which I believe you should (0+ / 0-)

            - you must send them a letter telling them why.

            That grossly-misleading, fear-mongering, partisan email is simply inexcusable and they need to know that thinking customers will not put up with it.

            "Bernie Madoff's mistake was stealing from the rich. If he'd stolen from the poor he'd have a cabinet position." -OPOL

            by blue in NC on Tue Aug 27, 2013 at 04:32:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  A BANK sent you that crap? As part of a legitimate (0+ / 0-)

      official email?

      Please change banks immediately. And please contact your state's banking commission and Attorney General to file a complaint.

      That sort of politicking is grossly unprofessional and should not be allowed by regulators. Yeah, yeah..."regulate" banks...I know. Bad joke.

      But this sort of misleading rhetoric has no place in a financial institution's official communication to account holders.

      "Bernie Madoff's mistake was stealing from the rich. If he'd stolen from the poor he'd have a cabinet position." -OPOL

      by blue in NC on Tue Aug 27, 2013 at 04:31:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site