tazzygirl
Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:
What's more cost effective? Buy the insurance or pay the fine till medical care is needed then buy the insurance as one cannot be denied for any reason, including what would now be pre-existing?
Its not quite that easy. You need to look up the rules once again.
~FR~
Morally, I favor universal health care. I accept until shown otherwise that $1000 a year is cost shifted to insureds in order to compensate hospitals and doctors for ER care of the uninsured. I am troubled however by the economic argument that favors the abandonment of health care by employers. The first fifty employees let loose exempts the Corporation from any fine. Thereafter the penalty is only $2000 per employee no longer insured plus loss of the tax deduction the Employer enjoyed. But hc costs are over $9K per employee. Employer provided hc was born during WWII when factory wages were ceilinged and there was a shortage of labor, so it was an inducement for employees to work for the company providing good healthcare insurance. What is the disincentive for large companies to stop offering healthcare insurance? It is not sacred. Do they lose a competitive edge? Maybe in the hi tech fields they do? Or maybe they offer it selectively for engineers and other more valued employees. IDK. just asking.
http://beyondhealthcarereform.com/2011/03/health-care-reform-looking-ahead-to-2014-employer-mandate-part-i-pay-or-play-and-free-rider-penalties/
The employer penalties are based on the government subsidies. As we discussed in our earlier post, government subsidies are not available unless an individual’s household income is less than 400% of the federal poverty level ($89,400 for a family of four in 2011). If all employees of an employer have a household income greater than 400% of the federal poverty level, then these penalties would not apply. But, in reality, almost every employer will have at least one employee whose household income is less than 400%. The rest of this post assumes that an employer would have at least one such employee.
No Coverage Penalty (also known as “Pay or Play”)
If an employer does not offer full-time employees, and their dependents, an opportunity to enroll in employer coverage, and at least one full-time employee enrolls in the Exchange and the employee receives government subsidies to pay for Exchange coverage, then the employer is subject to this penalty. The penalty is $2,000 for each of an employer’s full-time employees. (In calculating the penalty, however, the first 30 employees are excluded). Employers can avoid this penalty by offering health coverage to full-time employees. However, the Unaffordable Coverage penalty may apply.
Unaffordable Coverage (also known as “Free Rider”)
If an employer offers full-time employees, and their dependents, an opportunity to enroll in employer coverage, that alone will not necessarily avoid penalties. Rather, the coverage offered must be both affordable and valuable. If at least one full-time employee enrolls in the Exchange and is certified to receive government subsidies because the employer’s coverage is considered either unaffordable or low-value, then the employer is subject to this penalty. The penalty is $3,000 for each full-time employee who is certified to receive government subsidies. (Unlike the no coverage penalty, this one is not based on all full-time employees.)
Synthesizing the government subsidies with the employer penalties, employers will need to offer coverage that is both affordable and high-value to avoid the employer penalties altogether. But doing so also means that the employees will not be eligible for government subsidies. Employers may want to consider whether their employee population would be better served in the Exchange with government subsidies or with affordable, valuable, employer-provided coverage. Employers will also want to consider how vouchers work, which we’ll discuss in our next post.
And then there are penalties that add up each day, per employee.... its not that simple for a business to get around.
Its scary how many dont get it.. or havent even read it.
< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 7/2/2012 9:18:02 AM >
_____________________________
Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.
|
RE: HELLO UNIVERSAL MEDICARE! - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread