Major Blow to Obamacare Mandate

by | Feb 15, 2017

Major Blow to Obamacare Mandate

by | Feb 15, 2017

IRS Won’t Reject Tax Returns That Don’t Answer Health Insurance Question

The tax agency has stopped requiring individual filers to indicate whether they maintained health coverage or paid the mandate penalty as required under the law

How much difference does a single line on a tax form make? For Obamacare’s individual mandate, the answer might be quite a lot.

Following President Donald Trump’s executive order instructing agencies to provide relief from the health law, the Internal Revenue Service appears to be taking a more lax approach to the coverage requirement.

The health law’s individual mandate requires everyone to either maintain qualifying health coverage or pay a tax penalty, known as a “shared responsibility payment.” The IRS was set to require filers to indicate whether they had maintained coverage in 2016 or paid the penalty by filling out line 61 on their form 1040s. Alternatively, they could claim exemption from the mandate by filing a form 8965.

For most filers, filling out line 61 would be mandatory. The IRS would not accept 1040s unless the coverage box was checked, or the shared responsibility payment noted, or the exemption form included. Otherwise they would be labeled “silent returns” and rejected.

Instead, however, filling out that line will be optional.

Read the rest at Reason.

Peter Suderman

Peter Suderman is features editor at Reason, where he writes regularly on health care, the federal budget, tech policy, and pop culture. He is also a film critic for The Washington Times and a 2010 Robert Novak Journalism Fellow.

View all posts

Recent Articles

Recent

An Unpopular War Is Breaking the People Fighting It

An Unpopular War Is Breaking the People Fighting It

A sailor aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln sent a message home that his family passed to Stars and Stripes anonymously, fearing retaliation. "Our mental health and physical health is in danger. We need help." By the time that message surfaced, the Lincoln had been gone...

read more
Whose ‘NAP’ Anyway?

Whose ‘NAP’ Anyway?

A considerable portion of libertarian infighting seems to stem from the largely unrecognized fact that there are two different ways to interpret the non-aggression principle (NAP). On the surface, the NAP seems clear: aggression is wrong. But there is a deontological...

read more
Presidential Entitlement and the 1998 Bombing of Sudan

Presidential Entitlement and the 1998 Bombing of Sudan

Last week was the 28th anniversary of the U.S. government's bombing of a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan. Scott Horton, director of the Libertarian Institute, observed last week that that wanton assault by the Clinton administration “helped make a folk hero out of bin...

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This