Comments on: Congress hath not the authority! http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/12/02/congress-hath-not-the-authority/ News Fri, 30 Jul 2010 03:28:07 +0000 hourly 1 By: Follow the Constitution http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/12/02/congress-hath-not-the-authority/comment-page-1/#comment-3527 Follow the Constitution Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:54:55 +0000 http://www.thepostemail.com/?p=3622#comment-3527 KJ, you are correct. The tax code does not provide a definition for individual. It is actually defined on the code of federal regulations. 26 CFR 1.1441-1 Requirement for deduction and withholding of tax on payments to foreign persons. (c) Definitions (3) Individual. (i) Alien individual. The term alien individual means an individual who is not a citizen... (ii) Nonresident alien individual. The term nonresident alien individual means a person described in section 7701(b)(1)(B), an alien individual who is... KJ, you are correct. The tax code does not provide a definition for individual. It is actually defined on the code of federal regulations.

26 CFR 1.1441-1 Requirement for deduction and withholding of tax on payments to foreign persons.
(c) Definitions
(3) Individual.
(i) Alien individual. The term alien individual means an individual who is not a citizen…
(ii) Nonresident alien individual. The term nonresident alien individual means a person described in section 7701(b)(1)(B), an alien individual who is…

]]> By: KJ Kaufman http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/12/02/congress-hath-not-the-authority/comment-page-1/#comment-3517 KJ Kaufman Thu, 03 Dec 2009 08:52:09 +0000 http://www.thepostemail.com/?p=3622#comment-3517 On page 20. of the House Bill H.R. 3962 under a section regarding High Risk Pool, we see the first definition of the individual as: “an eligible individual and is a resident of one of the 50 States or the District of Columbia.” Later, on page 27, under the same section, the term Citizenship is first used in stating: “No individual shall be an eligible individual under this section unless the individual is a citizen or national of the United States or is lawfully present in a State in the United States…” With respect to H.R. 3962 as quoted in the article referencing pages 302 and 303 of the Bill the quote used is the actual wording added to the tax code. Without searching the entire Bill, there appears to be no clear definition for Individual. Like the House Bill, the Senate Bill H.R. 3590 does not really define individual other than how the term would be generally understood. Like the House, the Senate also first qualifies individual on page 44 under a section regarding eligibility for insurance for those with pre-existing conditions. From page 44 of the Senate Bill it is stated: “ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL.—An individual shall be deemed to be an eligible individual for purposes of this section if such individual—(1) is a citizen or national of the United States or is lawfully present in the United States (as determined in accordance with section 1411)…” Later in the Senate bill, on page 324, the term “applicable individual” is used, yet again without the term individual ever being clearly defined. On page 20. of the House Bill H.R. 3962 under a section regarding High Risk Pool, we see the first definition of the individual as: “an eligible individual and is a resident of one of the 50 States or the District of Columbia.” Later, on page 27, under the same section, the term Citizenship is first used in stating: “No individual shall be an eligible individual under this section unless the individual is a citizen or national of the United States or is lawfully present in a State in the United States…” With respect to H.R. 3962 as quoted in the article referencing pages 302 and 303 of the Bill the quote used is the actual wording added to the tax code. Without searching the entire Bill, there appears to be no clear definition for Individual.

Like the House Bill, the Senate Bill H.R. 3590 does not really define individual other than how the term would be generally understood. Like the House, the Senate also first qualifies individual on page 44 under a section regarding eligibility for insurance for those with pre-existing conditions. From page 44 of the Senate Bill it is stated: “ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL.—An individual shall be deemed to be an eligible individual for purposes of this section if such individual—(1) is a citizen or national of the United States or is lawfully present in the United States (as determined in accordance with section 1411)…” Later in the Senate bill, on page 324, the term “applicable individual” is used, yet again without the term individual ever being clearly defined.

]]> By: Follow the Constitution http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/12/02/congress-hath-not-the-authority/comment-page-1/#comment-3510 Follow the Constitution Thu, 03 Dec 2009 04:30:24 +0000 http://www.thepostemail.com/?p=3622#comment-3510 So does this bill have a section that defines the meaning of "individual" or is this incorporating the meaning of "individual" from the tax code? If you read the tax code the only definition found of "individual" states "ILLEGAL ALIEN" So if they are using the tax codes definition of individual then this bill only applies to ILLEGAL ALIENS! So we the people who are citizens, this bill would not apply. And if they have a different definition for individual in this healthcare bill, then how does that pan out when adding the tax code into this bill where individual has two different meanings? So does this bill have a section that defines the meaning of “individual” or is this incorporating the meaning of “individual” from the tax code?

If you read the tax code the only definition found of “individual” states “ILLEGAL ALIEN”

So if they are using the tax codes definition of individual then this bill only applies to ILLEGAL ALIENS! So we the people who are citizens, this bill would not apply.

And if they have a different definition for individual in this healthcare bill, then how does that pan out when adding the tax code into this bill where individual has two different meanings?

]]>