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.


“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.

  1. IntelVet says:

    Would you have to declare if using a wire coat hanger from a military base?

    What if you had to coerce a Mexican doctor using an ATF supplied weapon?

    How do people like Mr. smith even get into government? I’d be pretty down on government too if he were my representative.

  2. dustbunny44 says:

    Since when is it a function of the IRS to audit funding for anything?
    I thought the IRS just collected and audited revenue/income.

    • Teddy Partridge says:

      The IRS will want to know if you use your Medical Savings Account, income of yours set aside without having paid federal taxes on it, to abort a pregnancy for yourself or your daughter that was not a result of incest or rape. This misuse of the funds, in the forced-birth proponents’ view, means federal fundage was used to finance your procedure.

      Your uterus belongs to the state. It’s only on loan to you.

      • PJEvans says:

        I’m not surprised at that. They think pensions for public employees are funded by taxpayers in general, but their own pensions are their personal savings and they deserve to get every penny of it back, with interest.

        (not ezactly OT: I understand the CBO release a report on the deficit. Is there anything about the assumptions they used to reach their conclusions?)

      • dustbunny44 says:

        Thanks for that. I hadn’t thought of IRS regs as having government auditors enforce subsidies. But it’s a subsidy and not really funding, as you get a maximum 35% off (plus state) by using your health savings acct. vs. getting whatever it is paid for when it’s needed as real health insurance should be.
        HSA is as much as we get these days, we’re on our own. Sad. and the CEO-class keeps getting raises.