ACA ObamaCare 2018 - Rules, Premiums, Info, Etc.
- Thread starter AllenChicago
- Start date
The tax man a cometh.
Wonder what this means for the family glitch, and the clawback of APTC for those that were not supposed to take APTC due to having access to group? How many employers will have at least employee that took the tax credit? What happens when employer proves MEC was offered? How long til chickens come home to roost?
And.....................I guess executive orders don't carry much weight.
I.R.S. Starts to Enforce Health Law’s Rule That Employers Offer Insurance
https://www.irs.gov/pub/notices/ltr226j.pdf
When the health law was passed, lawmakers feared that without an employer mandate, companies would cancel their insurance benefits and send large numbers of employees to the health care law’s insurance exchanges, where many people qualify for government subsidies. Employees who are offered health insurance through their jobs are ineligible for the subsidies.
Wonder what this means for the family glitch, and the clawback of APTC for those that were not supposed to take APTC due to having access to group? How many employers will have at least employee that took the tax credit? What happens when employer proves MEC was offered? How long til chickens come home to roost?
And.....................I guess executive orders don't carry much weight.
I.R.S. Starts to Enforce Health Law’s Rule That Employers Offer Insurance
https://www.irs.gov/pub/notices/ltr226j.pdf
When the health law was passed, lawmakers feared that without an employer mandate, companies would cancel their insurance benefits and send large numbers of employees to the health care law’s insurance exchanges, where many people qualify for government subsidies. Employees who are offered health insurance through their jobs are ineligible for the subsidies.
Except when eliminating the CSR money to the carriers....
We both know trump was paying them illegally. No EO needed to stop breaking law.
I don't accept your premise. I've read both sides of the argument and gave up. Both sides are right. Its way too ambiguous for me. The Supreme Court needs to decide and we need to move on.
Yagents, correct me if I am wrong, but being offered MEC alone isn't enough for employee/dependents not to be eligible for subsidy, it has to be a plan with minimum essential coverage and minimum value at less than approx. 9.5% (I know it changes but just an average) household income for employee only coverage.
There are tons of those temp agencies offering those MEC policies that literally only cover preventive stuff (due to a loophole supposedly protects them from the fine for not offering coverage and protects the employee from the fine--at least according to the companies selling it), but in reality they are not major medical with prescriptions coverage, hospitalization coverage, etc. They wouldn't cover you if you got in a car accident or had appendicitis, etc. I don't believe those would be minimum value for subsidy eligibility determination.
Now, what I am not clear on is what happens to the employee's subsidy if those temp companies send a 1095 in saying their coverage was MEC and minimum value when in point of fact it was not. BEcause I read over the 1095C instructions, and in several places it refers to "minimum value" (as well as MEC). What happens if the employers just lie?? How would that be proved?
Who would complain at that point? Individuals complaining to the IRS when they get clawed back?
Those crappy MECs gets the employer out of the penalty.
CMS/HHS came out and said a couple years ago, people with these min value MEC's ARE eligible for APTC.
I'm not concerned with that as I don't have any clients in that situation.
I am more concerned for all those families where adding the family to the group plan was too expensive, and they applied for and were granted APTC with the help of HC.gov reps or agents. These families are NOT eligible for APTC, and just wondering when this will catch up with them. If ever................
CMS/HHS came out and said a couple years ago, people with these min value MEC's ARE eligible for APTC.
I'm not concerned with that as I don't have any clients in that situation.
I am more concerned for all those families where adding the family to the group plan was too expensive, and they applied for and were granted APTC with the help of HC.gov reps or agents. These families are NOT eligible for APTC, and just wondering when this will catch up with them. If ever................
The problem I have with the whole thing is that my family needs insurance. My dependents are on FB underwritten which is acceptable. My premium will be upwards of $900/month which is unacceptable.
Premiums are too high regardless of who pays them. We have what is politely called a cluster headache. Congress particularly the Repubs are doing all they can to make things worse while they sit in their nice cushy offices with healthcare for pennies compared to what anyone else unsubsidized has to pay. They should be forced to enroll at full premium with no group option available even if they or a friend owns a company that will let them enroll. We would have a fix by 1/1.
Premiums are too high regardless of who pays them. We have what is politely called a cluster headache. Congress particularly the Repubs are doing all they can to make things worse while they sit in their nice cushy offices with healthcare for pennies compared to what anyone else unsubsidized has to pay. They should be forced to enroll at full premium with no group option available even if they or a friend owns a company that will let them enroll. We would have a fix by 1/1.
Middle-Class Families Confront Soaring Health Insurance Costs
"Consumers here at first did not believe the health insurance premiums they saw when they went shopping for coverage this month on HealthCare.gov. Only five plans were available, and for a family of four with parents in their mid-30s, the cheapest plan went typically for more than $2,400 a month, nearly $30,000 a year."
"The online federal marketplace, HealthCare.gov, recommended another plan for Mr. Dixon in 2018. The new plan, offered by Optima Health, has premiums of $3,158 a month — about $37,900 a year — and an annual deductible of $9,200.
Alternatively, Mr. Dixon could pick a lower-cost plan offered by Optima with premiums of about $2,500 a month, or $30,000 a year. But the deductible would be much higher. The Dixons would need to spend $14,400 a year for certain health care services before Optima would begin to pay.
The Stovalls are facing similar mathematics.
“Our premiums will triple to $3,000 a month, with a $12,000 deductible, and that is far, far out of reach for us,” Ms. Stovall said after researching the options for her family of four on HealthCare.gov.
"
"Consumers here at first did not believe the health insurance premiums they saw when they went shopping for coverage this month on HealthCare.gov. Only five plans were available, and for a family of four with parents in their mid-30s, the cheapest plan went typically for more than $2,400 a month, nearly $30,000 a year."
"The online federal marketplace, HealthCare.gov, recommended another plan for Mr. Dixon in 2018. The new plan, offered by Optima Health, has premiums of $3,158 a month — about $37,900 a year — and an annual deductible of $9,200.
Alternatively, Mr. Dixon could pick a lower-cost plan offered by Optima with premiums of about $2,500 a month, or $30,000 a year. But the deductible would be much higher. The Dixons would need to spend $14,400 a year for certain health care services before Optima would begin to pay.
The Stovalls are facing similar mathematics.
“Our premiums will triple to $3,000 a month, with a $12,000 deductible, and that is far, far out of reach for us,” Ms. Stovall said after researching the options for her family of four on HealthCare.gov.
"
- 10,313
Its finally starting to hit the fan for the majority
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Dale M. Krause - Pioneer of Medicaid Compliant Annuities - Background- Latest: Dale M Krause