New Penalty for not having H & A Insurance

[dyne]

In glancing through a preliminary report on the new Health Insurance it appears that
for 2014 the penalty will be a minimum of $95 for those who do NOT have health insurance
but the penalty is the GREATER of $95 or 1% of income. A 1% penalty for a taxpayer with
$50,000 income would be $500. For the year 2016 the penalty upon a taxpayer with
$50,000 would be $1250. I consider these to be rather stiff penalties. I wonder if
having medicare or the social security supplemental insurance would qualify to
eliminate this penalty? Of course all of this is subject to change and interpretation. The new
health care law appears to be TWO laws. H. R. 3590 is 50 pages just for the summary.
H. R 4872 which is the main part of the law is hundreds or thousands of pages long.
And changes are to come.

[BOB W]

In glancing through a preliminary report on the new Health Insurance it appears that
for 2014 the penalty will be a minimum of $95 for those who do NOT have health insurance
but the penalty is the GREATER of $95 or 1% of income. A 1% penalty for a taxpayer with
$50,000 income would be $500. For the year 2016 the penalty upon a taxpayer with
$50,000 would be $1250. I consider these to be rather stiff penalties. I wonder if
having medicare or the social security supplemental insurance would qualify to
eliminate this penalty? Of course all of this is subject to change and interpretation. The new
health care law appears to be TWO laws. H. R. 3590 is 50 pages just for the summary.
H. R 4872 which is the main part of the law is hundreds or thousands of pages long.
And changes are to come.

The way I understand it, and I could be wrong, in all cases you get health care (insurance or not) so paying the penalty is cheaper than paying for insurance...........

[erchess]

hmmm

I thought the idea was that paying the penalty was supposed to be more expensive than paying for insurance. If we are going to provide medical care for everyone then we are going to have to collect some money from everyone.

[BOB W]

I thought the idea was that paying the penalty was supposed to be more expensive than paying for insurance. If we are going to provide medical care for everyone then we are going to have to collect some money from everyone.

This is so screwed up. What kind of planning when into this whole thing, my guess is none. It is all a ploy to have goverment control ALL aspect of our everyday life and spend down this country's wealth. Imagine the United States ending up like Haiti, goverment is rich and the people are poor.

[JoshinNC]

I was doing some research for a client on the impact of the legislation

and ran across an even stupider (is that a word?) part of the rules. Company provides h/i for ee's, pays 50% of cost for ee coverage and may STILL have to pay a penalty.

Company is a manufacturer with average wages of $20-$25k per year, per ee (of course mgmt makes more, on average). Let's assume ee X is married (wife doesn't work) and has 3 kids. He makes $25k per year. His share of his 50% of h/i, plus cost for wife and kids is $250 per month (still VERY LOW for a family of 5). Because the total annual premium he pays exceeds 4% of his annual income ($1000 a year, come on!) he will be eligible for "premium assitance" from the feds. The bill states that if an ee recieves "premium assistance" to help pay for his coverage then the employer is subject to a $2000 penalty per ee that recieves assitance. So think about this, the employer is providing coverage, paying 50% of the ee coverage and now has to pay a $2000 penalty because dipsh*t ee went out and had kids he can't afford to care for. Don't you think they'll just cancel the h/i and let the feds pay for everything and just pay the $3000 annual penalty?

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/8023-R.pdf

See page 2 under ER Requirements.
Hope you enjoy the change you voted for cause change is all you'll have left in your pocket at the end of the day. H/I is just the beginning, this administration and Congress are determined to take over every aspect of your life!

[BOB W]

and ran across an even stupider (is that a word?) part of the rules. Company provides h/i for ee's, pays 50% of cost for ee coverage and may STILL have to pay a penalty.

Company is a manufacturer with average wages of $20-$25k per year, per ee (of course mgmt makes more, on average). Let's assume ee X is married (wife doesn't work) and has 3 kids. He makes $25k per year. His share of his 50% of h/i, plus cost for wife and kids is $250 per month (still VERY LOW for a family of 5). Because the total annual premium he pays exceeds 4% of his annual income ($1000 a year, come on!) he will be eligible for "premium assitance" from the feds. The bill states that if an ee recieves "premium assistance" to help pay for his coverage then the employer is subject to a $2000 penalty per ee that recieves assitance. So think about this, the employer is providing coverage, paying 50% of the ee coverage and now has to pay a $2000 penalty because dipsh*t ee went out and had kids he can't afford to care for. Don't you think they'll just cancel the h/i and let the feds pay for everything and just pay the $3000 annual penalty?

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/8023-R.pdf

See page 2 under ER Requirements.
Hope you enjoy the change you voted for cause change is all you'll have left in your pocket at the end of the day. H/I is just the beginning, this administration and Congress are determined to take over every aspect of your life!

As more & more of the inner workings comes out a GREAT CHANGE will be appearent, REDISTRIBUTION to the poor and more to the GOVERMENT coffers.

[JG EA]

I have a question: Has anyone seen whether the type of insurance is mandated? In other words will a major-catastrophe-only policy work for having health insurance?

Also my other question: Have you been able to see if all employers will need to provide for all employees? Is there a provision for part-time being exempted?