Obamacare Glitch Could Make Coverage Unaffordable For Low-Wage Workers

[houcoogster]

I started last week , and know more.

Those on this board know more.

Just because he is an old dog in the biz doesn't mean they know what they are talking about in this new world

Kind of scary that a veteran agent will be giving bad advice. Gotta feel for the uninformed consumers out there.

In defense of my Bud I think he has been led astray by the execs at blue that don't know what they're talking about.

 

[RayNY]

Yes, we all know the way it's written today, your Bud was mis-informed. He might end up being right by the time you can enroll.

A big lobby contributor like BCBS ("heavy hitter" status from OpenSecrets, one of the top 140 contributors) may know what cards are coming up next in the deck. They paid for the damn deck.

 

[Ann H]

YAgents and RayNY are correct in stating that the spouse is NOT qualified to get a subsidy in this case unless the Employer specifically carved out spouses as an eligible class. Since Employers cannot carve out children, then children have no chance of getting a subsidy in this case. To reiterate, nobody in the family is qualified for a subsidy if they are ELIGIBLE FOR Employer sponsored coverage that is adequate (minimum value) and affordable (9.5% of household income rule, based on the EMPLOYEE-ONLY premium without regard to the cost for dependents).

As for this being waived administratively, we've already crossed that bridge and found it was impossible. The family glitch was written in the law rather than being subject to administrative guidance. That means that administrative departments like HHS, DOL and IRS cannot change it. It takes an act of Congress to change it, and since that would impact the cost of subsidies considerably (causing CBO to recalculate the hit to the budget), it is very unlikely to happen with this Congress.

 

[Yagents]

We should charge these so called "execs" a consulting fee. I hope they are not training the staff also.

 

[houcoogster]

YAgents and RayNY are correct in stating that the spouse is NOT qualified to get a subsidy in this case unless the Employer specifically carved out spouses as an eligible class. Since Employers cannot carve out children, then children have no chance of getting a subsidy in this case. To reiterate, nobody in the family is qualified for a subsidy if they are ELIGIBLE FOR Employer sponsored coverage that is adequate (minimum value) and affordable (9.5% of household income rule, based on the EMPLOYEE-ONLY premium without regard to the cost for dependents).

As for this being waived administratively, we've already crossed that bridge and found it was impossible. The family glitch was written in the law rather than being subject to administrative guidance. That means that administrative departments like HHS, DOL and IRS cannot change it. It takes an act of Congress to change it, and since that would impact the cost of subsidies considerably (causing CBO to recalculate the hit to the budget), it is very unlikely to happen with this Congress.

Ann,

But wasn't the Grassley amendment written in the law as well and now we see the OPM is overriding that somehow??

I'm not tying to argue (i know I would lose..lol) just asking what is and is not sacrosanct in this whole deal.

 

[Yagents]

They are "special"....................

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324635904578644202946287548.html

 

[Ann H]

It will be interesting to see what details they publish as the legal method of doing this. Once their details are published, I expect a flurry of questions about whether or not OPM can do that without Congressional appropriations, and questions about whether their method was available to Main Street American businesses, too.

 

[houcoogster]

They are "special"....................

Review & Outlook: Congress's ObamaCare Exemption - WSJ.com

Wow that's one hell of an article, thanks!

 

[RayNY]

I wonder if the CBO has to update their estimates on the cost of implementation now that a few thousand dollars per person is involved.

By my math (Congressional staff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia as a reference), there's a bit over 5300 people covered. Lets say it's an $8000 contribution on average, because presumably, most of these people have families (and plans will cost more than they do now).

That's a bit over $40MM/yr, or $0.4 Billion if you use their 10-year window.

Actually, that's basically a rounding error as far as this law is concerned. No biggie.

 

[bluediamond]

YAgents and RayNY are correct in stating that the spouse is NOT qualified to get a subsidy in this case unless the Employer specifically carved out spouses as an eligible class. Since Employers cannot carve out children, then children have no chance of getting a subsidy in this case. To reiterate, nobody in the family is qualified for a subsidy if they are ELIGIBLE FOR Employer sponsored coverage that is adequate (minimum value) and affordable (9.5% of household income rule, based on the EMPLOYEE-ONLY premium without regard to the cost for dependents).

As for this being waived administratively, we've already crossed that bridge and found it was impossible. The family glitch was written in the law rather than being subject to administrative guidance. That means that administrative departments like HHS, DOL and IRS cannot change it. It takes an act of Congress to change it, and since that would impact the cost of subsidies considerably (causing CBO to recalculate the hit to the budget), it is very unlikely to happen with this Congress.

I knew this, but is that for any size group or over 50? That I don't know.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
You know there wasn't much on the certification about this or if there was I slept through and passed it by luck. lol