Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Felicia Sonmez  |  twitter  On Twitter: @2chambers  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed  |  E-Mail Felicia  |  Articles
Posted at 3:10 PM ET, 03/ 3/2011

House votes to repeal '1099' tax-reporting requirement in health-care law

By Felicia Sonmez

The House on Thursday approved a measure that would repeal the unpopular '1099' tax-reporting requirement for small businesses included in the national health-care law.

It passed on a 314-to-112 vote, with all Republicans present as well as 76 Democrats voting in favor; 112 Democrats were opposed.

Both Democrats and Republicans, as well as the White House, support repealing the provision, which requires businesses to report to the Internal Revenue Service all purchases of $600 or more.

But there remain deep partisan divisions over how to pay for 1099 repeal, which would result in an estimated $22 billion loss in revenue over the next decade.

The Republican-led measure that passed the House Thursday would pay for it by forcing greater repayment of health insurance subsidies for families whose income exceeds certain thresholds. A Democratic-sponsored version that overwhelmingly passed the Senate last month, meanwhile, would pay for repeal by using untapped federal funds.

House Republicans contend that the plan that passed Thursday would reduce the deficit by $166 million over the next decade. Democrats have countered that it would increase the burden on the middle class.

By Felicia Sonmez  | March 3, 2011; 3:10 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: House Democrats mum on spending cuts; Republicans say more stopgap measures possible
Next: House Republicans: We'll cut $2 billion a week until Democrats propose spending plan

Comments

Excellent ... WHERE IS THE REPLACEMENT?

Posted by: AMviennaVA | March 3, 2011 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Based on all that is known, I trust the Dems to have a better grip on the financial outcomes than the Republicans. The middleclass is expendible according to the Republicans.

Posted by: EarlC | March 3, 2011 3:42 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand this vote.

Doesn't voting to repeal the entire health care reform also repeal this "1099" provision?

Unless there is some doubt about the repeal of the entire reform!

Posted by: kishorgala | March 3, 2011 3:42 PM | Report abuse

So the bottom line is that the House Republicans have sponsered and passed legislation that will add $22B in debt.

Posted by: Lefty_ | March 3, 2011 3:51 PM | Report abuse

How much of a burden is the reporting requirement? More than $22B?? I don't think so.

Posted by: fluxgirl | March 3, 2011 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Finally, something worthwhile that doesn't involve religious debates (e.g. Planned Parenthood funding cuts).

Posted by: DemoDevil | March 3, 2011 4:02 PM | Report abuse

The Teapublicans ran a wholly disingenuous 2010 campaign, which obviously had NOTHING to do with creating jobs, encouraging economic growth, replacing Health Care Reform with a viable alternative, or even reducing the debt/deficit in a serious manner. It's the disingenuous nature of the GOP agenda that really gets me.


If they were about solving serious problems and we disagreed on policy, that would be one thing. But as it stands now, it is obvious that they have no intention of acting in a serious manner. They are consumed with smacking Democrats as their ideological opposition and preventing Obama from getting any political wins. That is what drives them and it does nothing but actively undermine the country in which we all live.


The Teahadists are out to destroy our freedom and decades of policies to help the average hard working American. 2012 is payback time, and I can't wait.

.

Posted by: DrainYou | March 3, 2011 4:08 PM | Report abuse

When is the House going to start creating jobs?

Posted by: interactingdc | March 3, 2011 4:10 PM | Report abuse

And this will create jobs how?

Posted by: jckdoors | March 3, 2011 4:12 PM | Report abuse

To the Republican House members:

The mantra up to the mid-term election was about creating jobs, where are the jobs? You came into power with a lions roar about how you republicans were going to create jobs, remember, jobs, jobs, jobs. There are still millions without jobs so i ask again, where are the jobs? You also said you were going to cut $100 billion but realized soon afterwards, it was not going to work. So lets talk about the jobs that you were going to create. Ok, where are the jobs? Oh thats not going to happen either?

Thank You,

American Citizen

Posted by: Realistic5 | March 3, 2011 4:22 PM | Report abuse


When is the House gonna vote on some JOBS?

These turkeys are only wasting time. WHERE ARE THE JOBS?????

And I'm not talking about the ones they plan to cut.

***

Posted by: Evenfoolsarerightsometimes | March 3, 2011 4:23 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand this vote.

Doesn't voting to repeal the entire health care reform also repeal this "1099" provision?

Unless there is some doubt about the repeal of the entire reform!

Posted by: kishorgala | March 3, 2011 3:42 PM
*********************

Shhhhhh! You're not supposed to notice that! To Republicans, this is all theatre; never mind the man behind the arras.....

Posted by: abqcleve | March 3, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Wow, when the budget is up for approval, these folks want to slash everything in sign because of the deficit. When healthcare is on the floor, it is no problem adding to the deficit.

We are told daily that the cost of "entitlements" like social security and medicare are the budget problems that need to be fixed, but these geniuses reduced by 2% everyone's contribution to social security. And of course, lest anyone wonder who is going to be required to pay for whatever deficits ensue, the previous congress retained for 2 years income tax cuts on wages above $350,000.

Of course the deficit will continue to rise if the wealthy and large corporations are able to continue to decline the opportunity to pay their fair share of the cost of this country which they profess to love so very much.

So no surprise that they are once again decreasing the tax burden on business. Not a problem because those at the bottom of the economic totem pole will merely be required to work until they are 70 to pay for it. Hypocrites all!

Posted by: happilyretired1 | March 3, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Not only does this add to the debt. It also increases taxes on most Americans by shifting the burden to the middleclass.
According to C-Span the average tax hike will be about $1200.00 per person.
In almost 3 months the GOP have added to the debt, Increased taxes on most Americans, and CREATED NO JOBS. But alas, They are going on another vacation. Boy did American get it WRONG in November.

Posted by: sumo1 | March 3, 2011 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Once again the Republicans show leasership while the Dems whinge about not being able to spend money they don't have.

The atrocity that is the Affordable Health Care Act must be dismantled wherever possible and repealed in full when we have an honest President in place.

Many posters on here are whining about 22 billion added to the defecit. Read the article, it clearly states how the Republicans will pay for this move. On the other hand the Democrats want to use "untapped federal funds". How ridiculous is that? If there are untapped funds out there then get them back into the Treasury and use it to reduce debt.

McKenna7s definition

Untapped Funds--Stimulus money the Democrats have not yet spent wastefully.

Posted by: mckenna7 | March 3, 2011 4:52 PM | Report abuse

THANK YOU HOUSE! That was going to be a nightmare to comply with each year. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | March 3, 2011 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Realistic5 wrote:

"To the Republican House members:

The mantra up to the mid-term election was about creating jobs, where are the jobs? You came into power with a lions roar about how you republicans were going to create jobs, remember, jobs, jobs, jobs. There are still millions without jobs so i ask again, where are the jobs? You also said you were going to cut $100 billion but realized soon afterwards, it was not going to work. So lets talk about the jobs that you were going to create. Ok, where are the jobs? Oh thats not going to happen either?"
_________________________________________

They're trying to stop the further job- bleeding of this stupid provision.

And for the poster who mentioned "adding $22B" to the debt: Wrong again. It wasn't there before, so how could it add to anything?

For the majority of you who have never owned a small business, I suggest you talk about something you know about.

Posted by: wearedoomed1 | March 3, 2011 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Look at the vote silly Dims: a 314-to-112 vote.

More than 40% of the Democrat votes were for repeal of this measure.

Posted by: screwjob26 | March 3, 2011 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Who were the 112 idiots?

Posted by: wewintheylose1 | March 3, 2011 5:24 PM | Report abuse

As a small business owner I am very confused as to how the business community could want to repeal this reporting requirement -- unless the business community just wants to encourage tax evasion. Obviously if Congress understand that lifting this reporting requirement will enable businesses to engage in $22 billion worth of tax fraud during the next decade.

I've been amazed at all the fraud in which my fellow business owner engage to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. It's not enough that Congress was suckered into maintaining the lower tax rates Bush gave us -- thus shifting more of the tax burden onto those least able to afford to bear it. It's not enough that we've suckered Congress into giving us business owners one subsidy after another -- we're really enjoying the Republican culture of socialism for the wealthy and capitalism for the poor -- all while we business owner decry socialism.

And now the Republicans who profess to be for law and order pass a law that will only enable fraud and tax evasion to the tune of $22 billion over ten years -- and they expect the middle class to pick up the tab.

So I say "thank you" to the Republicans who are so eager to let us cheat. We appreciate the class warfare you've been waging against the middle class for so long and how you have suckered so much of the middle class to support laws and policies against their self-interest and favor of the criminal element in the business community -- as we laugh all the way to the bank.

Thanks suckers.

Posted by: dl49 | March 3, 2011 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I thought the health care bill was a job killer, so repealing even part of it should restore some jobs.

those jobs will generate new income taxes. Problem solved!

unless, of course, all that stuff about job killing was hooey.

Posted by: summicron1 | March 3, 2011 5:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm still waiting for one the legislators to tell me why they voted the healthcare bill into law.......

Posted by: momof20yo | March 3, 2011 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Almost everyone agrees that the 1099 provision should be repealed because it was burdensome. How to pay for the cost of repealing this provision is the issue.

Posted by: chi-town | March 3, 2011 6:27 PM | Report abuse

For all of you that are caught up in the left-right political paradigm.... I like what Governor Ventura said in an interview, "Politicians are like pro wrestlers. In front of the camera they are bitter enemies but behind the camera, they are out dining and drinking with each other."

Posted by: FernaoDeMagalhaes | March 3, 2011 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Gee, let's anayyze this decision. If the reporting reuirement was so burdensome and costly it should have created jobs---oops, there go the jobs, income, etc. On the other hand since most small businesses use some form of accounting software, the additional effort to accomplish this is at most 2 clicks per vendor......therefore the deficit hawks have given up $22 billion in revenue......this is really all smoke and no fire.

Posted by: KENMAREINC | March 3, 2011 8:48 PM | Report abuse

As much as I dislike republicans and tea-baggers, they've finally done something half-way intelligent. the 1099 reporting requirement was bs to begin with; even the IRS didn't want it. creating these 1099s isnt as easy as some of you make it out to be; you obviously don't have an idea of the hoops small businesses have to jump thru.

Posted by: reader011 | March 3, 2011 10:30 PM | Report abuse

The problem with the 1099 law was its difficulty in adhering to. Suppose you run an interstate trucking company. In January one truck gets $400 in diesel fuel at Joe's Truck Stop in Ohio. In November another truck gets $300 in diesel fuel from Bob's Truck Stop in Arkansas. Unbeknownst to anybody but the truck stop owners, both truck stops are owned by the same corporation. Therefore the trucking company, by not filing a 1099, would unwittingly be in violation of the law.

An added complication: Suppose that both truck stops were independently owned when the trucks gassed up in January and November. But in December one truck stop bought the other one. Now what?

This law would have been an absolute nightmare.

By the way, why was this requirement included in the Obamacare law? What does it have to do with health care?

Posted by: MrBethesda | March 3, 2011 11:27 PM | Report abuse

translation:

Dems do not want to lose their brainwashing union money that is the crrupt element that placed them.


Unions gutted Detroit, and now the US FED.

Posted by: dottydo | March 4, 2011 12:58 AM | Report abuse

WE ARE QUICKLY GOING TO GOVERNMENT WITHOUT REPRESENTATION.
WITHOUT UNIONS OR GOVERNMENT- CORPORATIONS CAN TAX THE WORKING CLASS AS MUCH AS THEY WANT.JUST RAISE THE PRICE..
UNIONS HAVE BEEN A PROTECTOR OF WORKER RIGHTS
JUST AS THE REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN A PROTECTOR OF THE RICH.
NOW REPUBLICANS WANT TO STOP WORKER RIGHTS

HEALTH CARE REFORM WAS NEEDED TO STOP THE MILLION DOLLAR SALARY'S AND BONUSES THAT 300 TO 400 PERCENT RAISE IN HEALTH PREMIUMS PROVIDED FROM 2000 TO 2008
THE HIGH PREMIUMS DIDN'T IMPROVE HEALTH CARE ONLY CEO'S AND INSURANCE PROFITS.
WITHOUT HEALTH CARE REFORM AND ANOTHER ROUND OF 300 TO 400 PERCENT RAISES
THE WORKING CLASS WILL HAVE NO INSURANCE.THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT
WHEN PEOPLE STOP PAYING AND SAVE THAT PREMIUM.
INSURANCE AND DOCTORS WILL FAIL TOO.
NO PREMIUMS

Posted by: theoldmansays | March 4, 2011 5:38 AM | Report abuse

The 1099 reporting requirement was going to be a huge burden on small business. Businesses are already suffering because of the poor economy. Business is already down for many of us and then to have to add an extra person to the payroll just doesn't make sense. The way the law reads we in essence would have to fill out a 1099 for each person who walks through our doors. The $600 provision is a cumulative amount. If someone spends $350 today and then next week spends $300, we would have to fill out a 1099. Most customers are not going to want to do this as it is an invasion of privacy. They would not want to give me their social security number, etc. So this law would succeed in further killing business!! I am Democratic in most of my thinking and political views but am glad this 1099 law is being repealed.

Posted by: glenvwcoin | March 4, 2011 5:52 AM | Report abuse

Judging from the comments being posted, our public school system has done an excellent job of indoctrinating as opposed to teaching. It would be difficult to find a more inane collection of insipid commentary published anywhere on the planet. The ignorant support of the commentators for a huge burden being placed on small business by an over reaching government is an indicator of their education level. I doubt most of those posting could run a lemonade stand, much less a small business.

Posted by: thepubba | March 4, 2011 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Here are the ones that voted against the 1099 repeal (They need to go in 2012)


Ackerman
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berman
Blumenauer
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Capps
Capuano
Carson (IN)
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (IL)
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Hirono
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Markey
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Polis
Rangel
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns


____________________________________
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey

Posted by: icpkgman | March 4, 2011 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Here are the ones that voted against the 1099 repeal (They need to go in 2012)


Ackerman
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berman
Blumenauer
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Capps
Capuano
Carson (IN)
Chu
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Conyers
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (IL)
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Hinchey
Hirono
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Luján
Lynch
Markey
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Polis
Rangel
Richmond
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns


____________________________________
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey

Posted by: icpkgman | March 4, 2011 9:24 AM | Report abuse

You can really tell who the leftist whack jobs are in the House based on this vote.

Posted by: bot_feeder | March 4, 2011 10:14 AM | Report abuse

How can you have untapped funds when we are not fully funded and deficits are the norm? More smoke and mirrors.
To the point I cannot vote for any party in power since they all seem to be painted with same brush!

Posted by: frankramsey | March 4, 2011 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company