Obamacare Upheld Against Another Challenge – Court Rules Against Sissel
So it was not a mandate, really. It is a tax, which gave Mr. Sissel another opening. Bills to raise revenue are supposed to start in the House of Representatives (Origination Clause). Mr. Sissel’s reading of the legislative history indicated that there was a tax bill that started in the House, that had nothing to do with health care. The Senate gutted that bill and put in the Affordable Care Act. So really, the bill started in the Senate.
Apparently, we won’t have to sort through that legislative mishegas, because the Court ruled that even though the mandate is a tax, it is not designed to raise revenue, even though it may raise quite a bit of revenue.
Retailer Can Only Deduct Perks When Redeemed
Accordingly, whether a customer paid something for the purchase of gas or nothing, petitioner’s obligation to redeem fuelperks! was subject to a condition precedent that could be satisfied only after the close of petitioner’s tax year. We find that petitioner’s liability for outstanding fuelperks! became fixed upon their redemption, not when the customer earned the fuelperks! as petitioner contends. We thus hold that the claimed deductions for the outstanding fuelperks liabilities do not satisfy section 461(h)(4) and section 1.461-1(a)(2), Income Tax Regs.
Follow Me
Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one’s affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant.