ObamaCare hasn't even started yet, and money is already missing.

[Velvet Elvis]

Personally, I'm not surprised.

[h=1]IRS Watchdog: $67 Million Missing from Obamacare Slush Fund[/h]From the article:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The IRS is unable to account for $67 million spent from a slush fund established for Obamacare implementation, according to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report released today.

According to the report: “Specifically, the IRS did not account for or attempt to quantify approximately $67 million [from the slush fund] of indirect ACA costs incurred for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012.”

Wow...golly...gee... I wonder what the Jerk-In-Chief thinks about this? ...or if he even cares. See, 0bamaCare isn't about helping anyone. It's about forcing the masses to be reliant on Mother Government. Stupid, ignorant losers who will rely on politicians for their very livelihood. Once addicted (like drug addicts), the oligarchs need only to threaten to "cut them off," and they're guaranteed votes.

But back to the $67 million dollars that are missing. It's bad enough that 0bamaCare is packed to the gills with pork, but now the oligarchs are pilfering from the fund to boot. When this abortion of a law starts kicking in, who's gonna be out their "coverage," because Mother Government doesn't have enough scratch in the kitty? Will they still think 0bamaCare is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Imagine the BILLIONS that will be pilfered when funding really kicks in.

 

[Greenbeard]

Unless I'm reading this incorrectly, the report doesn't say that money is missing from the reform implementation fund. It says the IRS is incurring (indirect) costs related to the ACA that it's failing to attribute to the implementation effort (and thus isn't charging to that fund). Looks like they're being chastised for not cost-allocating part of their office space and IT expenses to ACA funding sources. Which would be the opposite of funds disappearing from those funding sources--they should be charging them!

We also found that the IRS did not track all costs associated with implementation of the ACA, including costs not applied to the HIRIF. Specifically, the IRS did not account for or attempt to quantify approximately $67 million of indirect ACA costs incurred for FYs 2010 through 2012. Indirect costs include, for example, providing employees with workspace and information technology support.

In FYs 2010 through 2012, the IRS received funds from the HIRIF for annual direct labor and related benefit costs totaling $162 million cumulatively. However, our review of the IRS’s records indicated that it did not account for or attempt to quantify any indirect costs during FYs 2010 through 2012. Based on the IRS’s own internal cost accounting guidelines, the indirect costs associated with these direct labor charges likely totaled approximately $67 million for FYs 2010 through 2012. The excluded indirect costs relate to providing employees with the workspace, support, and ongoing access to the full range of tools and technology support necessary for the performance of their jobs. For example, while the IRS may have been able to place most new employees hired for the ACA in existing leased space, it still had to pay rent on this space, could not use the space for other purposes, and could not consider the space for inclusion in its ongoing space reduction efforts.

 

[Deuce]

Unless I'm reading this incorrectly, the report doesn't say that money is missing from the reform implementation fund. It says the IRS is incurring (indirect) costs related to the ACA that it's failing to attribute to the implementation effort (and thus isn't charging to that fund). Looks like they're being chastised for not cost-allocating part of their office space and IT expenses to ACA funding sources. Which would be the opposite of funds disappearing from those funding sources--they should be charging them!

Hey now let's not let ****ing facts get in the way here.