Tim Noah, who has done some good work in effect blogging on the health bill/law, recently had a piece entitled: "Maybe the Individual Mandate Is Enforceable -- The IRS commissioner explains how he'll make you buy health insurance." A criminal action or a lien is removed, but the law references another section of the code that deals with the collection of taxes generally. I looked at it when Noah talked about this before.*
Though some people suggest it is impossible, actually, it is possible to actually read the legislation and think things through. Of course, lots of talk about process (that few care about any more) and "death panels" etc. dominated coverage so this sort of thing was not done as often as it could be. Instead, only after the legislation is passed did I see a summary of it in my local paper. Yes, there was some efforts beforehand, but this basic issue underlines it was not done enough. Same here: why not just call a tax attorney or CPA? Noah is getting paid for that sort of thing, isn't he?
Anyway, there are more than two ways to attack the problem. As noted in the article, I don't think (though don't think it won't be tried) "liens" means that if you were going to get a rebate after doing your 2018 taxes, and didn't pay that $695, the government would be required to provide it anyways. I'm willing to bet that the rebate arises from actually paying all your taxes. You know, you (or your accountant) determines all the taxes you owe and deduct it from those you paid, and you get the rebate. If you are getting back $200 but didn't declare that $695, you don't really rightly deserve that $200.
As the article notes, we are talking about a narrow group here anyways:
Since only people who earn income above the filing limit and for whom health insurance premiums are less than 8% of income are covered by the penalty, I would expect that most of the people who might get hit by the penalty will be independent contractors and self-employed individuals—farmers, ranchers, lawyers, accountants, movie script writers, consultants, etc. Most of these people have complicated taxes and probably will 1.) want health insurance, and 2.) prefer to keep their heads down with the IRS. If you are filing a hundred-page tax return, the last thing you want to do is to throw up a red flag in the face of the IRS.
Some will fall between the cracks, but that is the case for lots of people who don't pay all their taxes. People who don't have insurance will likely still follow the law -- people still tend to do that sort of thing. Some of the rest will have tax rebates, if some audit is done or whatever, that covers this sort of thing in whole or in part. The rest is a fraction of a fraction and doesn't make the measure pointless.
Finally, the no nos are criminal penalties and liens. Well, there are a lot of other things possible. A civil fine is not a "criminal penalty." Also, do you want a federal contract or to work for an institution that has some sort of federal funding, including let's say doing a building job of some sort so related? Oh wait. You have a pending tax bill that you never paid. No criminal penalty or lien required -- no job for you. Again, we are talking about a narrow group of people anyways.
More evidence of much ado about nothing much, except that this sort of thing should have been addressed better beforehand.
---
* It you follow the link and page notation in Noah's article, you get this:
The penalty provided by this section shall be paid upon notice and demand by the Secretary, and except as provided in paragraph (2), shall be assessed and collected in the same manner as an assessable penalty under subchapter B of chapter 68.
It would be helpful if Noah or someone else paid to determine such a thing would explain what this means, but a quick Google search suggests this might be it.