Chris Smith Opposes IRS Enforcement on Undeclared $$, But Supports IRS Enforcement on Undeclared Babies

Chris Smith co-sponsored HR 4, which would overturn the provision of health care reform that required all businesses to issue 1099 forms for goods and services in excess of $600. The whole point of the 1099 provision was designed to crack down on unreported business income. Given Smith’s support for overturning the provision, we have to assume that he opposes the use of IRS to track and police undeclared business income.

Yet Smith authored HR 3, which deputizes the IRS to police abortion funding.

In testimony to a House taxation subcommittee on Wednesday, Thomas Barthold, the chief of staff of the nonpartisan Joint Tax Committee, confirmed that one consequence of the Republicans’ “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” would be to turn IRS agents into abortion cops—that is, during an audit, they’d have to detemine, from evidence provided by the taxpayer, whether any tax benefit had been inappropriately used to pay for an abortion.

[snip]

“Were this to become law, people could end up in an audit, the subject of which could be abortion, rape, and incest,” says Christopher Bergin, the head of Tax Analysts, a nonpartisan, not-for-profit tax policy group. “If you pass the law like this, the IRS would be required to enforce it.”

No wonder our government has such a big deficit. Republicans want to alter our entire tax code to police wombs, but not pocketbooks.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

0 Responses to Chris Smith Opposes IRS Enforcement on Undeclared $$, But Supports IRS Enforcement on Undeclared Babies

Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @barrettmarson It was nasty all the time.
38mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @barrettmarson @troyhaydenfox10 I miss the old CB-6. That was fun.
41mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Gonna be a lot of this for a very long time https://t.co/4OpGOjTg3t
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ryanlcooper Cable is going to be fantastic. All Trump, all the time. You'll love it!
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @imillhiser Same, and I am not convinced that Cruz wouldn't be worse in many ways. Not convinced Trump is better either.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @sahilkapur And disputing that its an acceptable justification for the difference in way Clinton/press acted then and way she is acting now.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @sahilkapur No, just disputing that the relative difference is of any current materiality as to whether Sanders stays in race.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @sahilkapur And the fact that relative delegate counts were a little different doesn't ratify the propriety of the situation; condemns it
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @sahilkapur Bullshit. The entire weight of the DLC/DNC and press lackeys were not oriented cravenly against Clinton then as are Sanders now.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @sahilkapur I think the statement speaks for itself.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @sahilkapur Dewey beats Truman! Let the people vote.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @sahilkapur And it is hilarious, if not flat out ridiculous that the press holds Sanders to a relative standard they didn't Clinton in 2008
2hreplyretweetfavorite
March 2011
S M T W T F S
« Feb   Apr »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031