and plenty of other ways. The IRS has been working on enforcement mechanisms for this for the past two years and is hiring hundreds (and soon thousands) of extra personnel to enforce this.

Oh, really? Must be nice to be able to make that kind of assumption.

ETA: And when these folks just go out and buy insurance, I guess you also have a plan for how they cover their deductible and co-pays.

from any income tax refund that you are receiving.

of a few hundred dollars. So long as a majority of the withholding is paid timely, you have, iirc, 10% leeway. So if at M & 2 you get a refund of $2000, perhaps change your W4 for the new year to M&4 and you should owe about $200 (better yet, check the tables and figure out the best place to be where you'll owe very little), then pay that on or before April 15th and viola! no refund to attach.

of taxes?

Do you enjoy living on the brink of destiny, going without any insurance ... so you can save $395? (while the rest of us may have to pick up a $30,000 tab for you when a bus hits you as you cross the street?).

I feel like we are on Free Republic here today. Me, me, me --- my money, the gubmint can't tell me what to do, let everyone fend for themselves. Jeezus.

People do not have money. We are in what Krugman calls a depression. Our wages have been declining for decades. Technocratic solutions that attempt to squeeze blood out of turnips so that government spreadsheets look marginally better while the .01% is allowed to extract ever more rents on the middle class can only fail. People are rightly rebelling against this corrupted system.

it can be what ever you want it to be so long as at the end of the year you're within 10% of what will be owed for the year.

of substantial amount.

If you "raise the number of dependents," you have to provide valid SSNs for those new dependents. If you get caught doing so (and the IRS does cross-check, so you can't simply use other family members), you can be charged with criminal fraud and tax evasion, which most definitely do carry criminal penalties.

The Tax Code, 26 U.S.C., imposes both (a) civil penalties and (b) criminal penalities.

The civil penalties applicable under 26 USC § 5000A are covered beginning at 5000A(b)

that no criminal penalties may be imposed, hence we cannot be put in jail for failure to pay. Furthermore, since the IRS does not need liens and levies and instead simply demands payment, they can do that in whatever manner is acceptable such as wage garnishment?

Or are you essentially agreeing with the OP in what seems a disagreeable manner?

Truly confused by some of your wording, not being snarky.

have decided to take.

One approach that could be taken is that the IRS could apply withholding taxes to the penalty instead of a taxpayer's normal tax liability and then go after a taxpayer on the grounds that an amount was still due on the normal tax liability. It is too soon to tell, however.

Am I essentially agreeing with the OP? No. The OP is operating under the impression that the IRS is powerless to collect a penalty when a statute provides that neither the criminal penalty procedures nor the levy and lien procedures are applicable. This is a meme that is causing confusion with some on the web. Congress did not adopt the civil penalty provision and pass the collection responsibility to the IRS without intending for the IRS to collect it.

We can expect the IRS to issue one or more Announcements and one or more Revenue Procedures.

the penalty tax. You believe him to be wrong as well?

No criminal penalties, and civil penalties require a lien.

All they can do to collect is reduce your tax refunds, or harass you enough so that you pay for them to go away.

You say, "All they can do to collect is reduce your tax refunds, or harass you ..."

If what you say is true, then all you have to do is never pay more taxes than what you actually owe for your tax liability.

On the other hand, if the IRS has certain powers which have not yet come to your attention, like applying applying withholding taxes to satisfy the penalty while leaving a portion of the regular tax liability unpaid, you'll have an opportunity to discover how toothless the IRS tiger is.

No one from Al Capone to Dan Rostenkowski has ever taken the position that the IRS is powerless to enforce a provision within the Tax Code. If you want to believe that the IRS is powerless in this area, believe what you want. If you want to test them, do that too.

Never mind.

That late payment incurs a penalty.

They can not use withholding from next year's taxes to pay that penalty. They can deduct from next year's refund, assuming you get one.

ETA: They also have several other civil and criminal means to collect that specific penalty.

You're kidding, surely.

Combined with fees, penalties, and interest, failing to pay the amount due would be pretty nasty. Bank accounts and wages and Federal/state entitlement payments aren't "property."

"shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or (criminal) penalty"


There can be a civil, financial penalty, but the IRS cannot seize property to enforce payment of that particular debt to the government.

You're so very wrong. The ways you are wrong have already been enumerated above, but you're, like, super wrong.

the Commonwealth.

They'll get it one way or another. It's very affordable, though, in MA. Income driven. It works very well here.

You make a good case, but I'm no expert...