Who Will They Blame in 2014

[taterpeeler]

Actually, I don't agree with that assessment. If the young democrats are welfare recipients or below 250% of FPL, then perhaps you have a valid point, but many of the young liberals are college educated yet leaning to the left. They won't get subsidies.

A single person making more than $45,960 or a married couple making more than $62,040 for instance are not below 400% of FPL and won't get a subsidy.

And even those making less than that, who do qualify for a subsidy in theory will find that their subsidy is $0 because they have to pay up to 9.5% of their income for it. So, they will be left paying the actual premium (which is much higher for young folks than the premium on their current plans).

For instance, let's take that young liberal who makes $45,000 and just barely squeeks into the "under 400% of FPL" category. He qualifies for a subsidy. But he has to pay the lesser of the actual premium or up to 9.5% of his income as his share of the premium. Well, 9.5% of $45,000 is $4275, which is $356.25 monthly. So, he has to pay the lesser of the actual premium or $356.25, and the subsidy kicks in after that. Let's say he's a male age 28 and his premium has been around $180. Predictions are that it will double to around $360 for a person his age. So, he pays $356.25, and his subsidy is $3.75. I don't think he will be happy.

and they will then be confused and dazed..... wonder what happened..... and reach out to the supreme leader for guidance and he will tell them its those evil gop folks.... but if they be sure and vote the gop out of office he will change it to single payer......

3 years later with single payer the little libby finds his taxes went up to 75% just to pay for all these things and now he screams again ad Hillary says well.... its obamas fault and we gut the military all to bring taxes down.....

now china and Russia see that we have a military using tanks from the Korean war and cant afford parts to fix them.... our drones have all been captured by iran so they invade next thing is we are all speaking Russian.... why??? because of health care reform and the GOP....god save us

 

[russelltw]

Great point Ann. I keep hearing that many will be eligible for the subsidy in NC. Still not so sure. The kicker will be the "affordable coverage" from group. I think that may knock a fair amount out.

I wonder if the spouse or kids will be able to get the subsidy if they have affordable group coverage.

 

[taterpeeler]

I wonder if the spouse or kids will be able to get the subsidy if they have affordable group coverage.

NO...................

 

[Newby]

George W. will get the blame.

It's worked great for everything else so far.

 

[AllenChicago]

Soon enough, the American people will revolt against the mandate, because premiums will skyrocket and the 1% tax penalty for 2014 isn't chump change. Especially when people realize that hundreds of dollars will be deducted from their tax refund. (Remember, it's $97 in 2014 or 1%, whichever is GREATER.) The BLAME will fall squarely on Obama's shoulders. There are numerous interviews where he was steadfastly behind every aspect of this debacle.

On a somewhat related note, a local Chicago Law Firm has avoided (temporarily?) an aspect of Obamacare's mandate by winning it's court case.

Story: Court Halts Enforcement of HHS Mandate | ObamaCare, American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ

-ac

 

[timsip]

NO...................

I didn't think group had to offer coverage for families. If this is the case, the family would still fall under the mandate and have to seek out their own coverage, wouldn't they?

 

[Ann H]

I didn't think group had to offer coverage for families. If this is the case, the family would still fall under the mandate and have to seek out their own coverage, wouldn't they?

Groups do not have to offer coverage to a SPOUSE, but they must offer coverage to children.

There is an exemption in the individual mandate saying that there is no penalty in a case like this where the children and/or spouse cannot afford the employer's plan and yet they are also prevented from receiving a subsidy due to this glitch in the law that says affordability is based on the self-only premium.

 

[timsip]

Groups do not have to offer coverage to a SPOUSE, but they must offer coverage to children.

There is an exemption in the individual mandate saying that there is no penalty in a case like this where the children and/or spouse cannot afford the employer's plan and yet they are also prevented from receiving a subsidy due to this glitch in the law that says affordability is based on the self-only premium.

Wouldn't affordability for the spouse then be based on that individual's income? If the spouse is not offered coverage under the group plan but the bronze plan is deemed affordable, the spouse then is mandated to purchase an individual plan, correct?

 

[Ann H]

Yes, in the situation you stated above, if the bronze plan is "affordable" (meaning it costs less than 8% of household income), then the spouse (who was NOT ELIGIBLE for group coverage by the other spouse's employer) must purchase at least a bronze level plan or pay the individual mandate penalty.

The key here is if the dependents are ELIGIBLE FOR the group plan. Children must be eligible, but the group may disallow spouse eligibility if the group decides to.

Dependents who are ELIGIBLE FOR the employer group insurance will not get a subsidy if the group coverage is "affordable" according to the self-only premium rule. If that happens, they are exempt from the penalty for going uninsured.

Dependents who are NOT ELIGIBLE for an "affordable" group plan offered by their own employer or their spouse's employer (like the spouse in your example), may go to the exchange and apply for a subsidy. If that spouse cannot obtain coverage for less than 8% of the household income, then the spouse is exempt from the penalty for being uninsured.