More IRS provisions in ObamaCare

[kcjenkins]

You all might be interested in the column in today's Wall Street Journal that points out that several penalties in the Code will be converted to "strict liability" (that is, the IRS will have no discretion to abate them for reasonable cause) in order to pay for the health care plan (the changes being right there in the health care bill's revenue provisions).

Let me suggest, that our clients are going to be looking closely to us for reimbursment when we can no longer get them off the hook. Does this make you happy?

Our kinder, gentler Administration and Congress hard at work...and saving American lives, no less. But then I guess whatever burden we wil bear is worth it, huh? Want to discuss this with your representatives and senators?

[MontanaEA]

This is not correct. The economic substance doctrine is irrelevant to virtually all individual taxpayers. (Are you in the habit of setting up shell corporations to minimize your individual tax liability?) The good faith defense would otherwise remain applicable to tax issues that don't implicate that doctrine.

[Catherine]

This is not correct. The economic substance doctrine is irrelevant to virtually all individual taxpayers. (Are you in the habit of setting up shell corporations to minimize your individual tax liability?) The good faith defense would otherwise remain applicable to tax issues that don't implicate that doctrine.

Perhaps you should see the 4-page Massachusetts health care form. Plus worksheets to figure penalties. That do NOT auto-calculate in ATX but have to be done by hand and over-ridden on each and every line.

Folks don't have to try to stick us with their penalties for the results to be onerous for us as tax preparers. Just putting the IRS (MassDOR) in charge of ensuring compliance and the headaches will start. Ask me how I know this...