Health insurance deadline - confused.

Evidently there is a deadline - sign up for health insurance or be fined $95.00 or 1% (by 3/31). I'm really confused though. A friend and myself checked into it, thinking "why not". She finds a premium calculator while I finish my stuff on the other end of the phone and comes back to tell me the results.

She has a business and is single with no children, with a bottom line of 11,010.00. This calculator is telling us that she would need to pay 5200.00 per year in premiums and would have around 12K in deductibles. How can this be right? I haven't even put my own accurate information in yet (estimated), as my taxes aren't done but from what I see thus far I will be accepting the fine and continue on without healthcare. She for sure will not be able to afford it.

I came here - hoping someone can advise, share that we have a bad link or are missing something.

kff.org...

If this is for real than why don't they just say, "all American's need to pay an extra tax of 1% of their income" instead of this whole fiasco. It appears all of this will vary by State but I really need to know how awake I am on this. Why is this called the "affordable" health care act?

reply to post by Dianec


Your friend will not have to pay the penalty of 1%. (or 95$). If your quoted premium is like 8% or more of your anual income, you can be waived. Let me find a link rq.



Okay here: Here's the exemptions list.
You’re uninsured for less than 3 months of the year;
The lowest-priced coverage available to you would cost more than 8% of your household income;
You don’t have to file a tax return because your income is too low;
You’re a member of a federally recognized tribe or eligible for services through an Indian Health Services provider;
You’re a member of a recognized health care sharing ministry;
You’re a member of a recognized religious sect with religious objections to insurance, including Social Security and Medicare;
You’re incarcerated, and not awaiting the disposition of charges against you; and
You’re not lawfully present in the U.S.

www.forbes.com...

reply to post by Dianec


The section here
"You could receive a government tax credit subsidy of up to:"

was she not eligible for any of that?

reply to post by Dianec


If everyone ignores the AHA, it will go away.

NON COMPLIANCE by large groups is probably the only effective strategy against government overreach on any number of issues.

reply to post by Dianec


She didn't go far enough to see the tax credit subsidy. I plugged her hypothetical into an online estimator and found that after subsidies, she can get a Bronze plan for $17.00/mo,a silver for $30 and the best plan for $87 with a$500 deductible. With her income there should be no fine. If she chooses to go uninsured and gets medical care that she can't pay for, the for profit medical system will redistribute wealth from you and me to her by increasing our costs to pay for hers.

reply to post by Dianec

If this is for real than why don't they just say, "all American's need to pay an extra tax of 1% of their income" instead of this whole fiasco....why is this called the "affordable" health care act?

Because they want a lot more than 1%, and because they have a rotten sense of humour.

pirhanna
reply to post by Dianec

 

If everyone ignores the AHA, it will go away.

NON COMPLIANCE by large groups is probably the only effective strategy against government overreach on any number of issues.

How right you are. Non violent, non cooperation.

For me, I practice a more holistic way of dealing with any health issues that may come from just growing older. I have zero confidence in western medicine and refuse to buy insurance. I take care of myself, and set aside money each month for any trauma care I may need. Trauma care is the only thing that the medical establishment is any good at. I just feel so much safer and wealthier having my own coverage.

reply to post by JohnTheSmith


Sorry it took me so long to respond - had an emergency to deal with. Thank you so much for that. I still don't get why they are even doing this then but I'm passing that on in a few minutes here.

reply to post by Char-Lee


I just went and put in 11,000 and here is that answer:

Qualifying subsidy is:

$0 per year
(which covers 0% of the overall premium).

If they want to help all Americans have health insurance shouldn't it be made affordable? For me - with blue cross I can get a policy for a little over 350 a month with a large deduct. With the affordable care act the premium is higher than someone who made less than I did in 2013. The blue cross one - rates are only a few dollars more than they were a couple of years ago. It simply makes no sense to me. If the aim is to get all citizens insured they aren't going to do it with rates like these and no subsidies. I suppose it depends on your State but I'm just really confused as to how this will work for the uninsured. Thanks for the feedback.

reply to post by F4guy


Did you put it in for Montana? Would this mean she would get it in the form of a tax refund? I'll try it again using my income info (or close to what I think it will be).

reply to post by Dianec

If you don't qualify for a subsidy you may qualify for extended Medicaid if your state provides it.

If they want to help all Americans have health insurance shouldn't it be made affordable?

That would be nice but the insurance companies do have to think about their interests and government interference in the marketplace isn't often a good thing. Because insurance companies now have to take on all applicants, their "exposure" is increased so it makes sense for their rates to go up for ACA compliant plans.

If the aim is to get all citizens insured they aren't going to do it with rates like these and no subsidies.

The aim is not to get all citizens insured. The aim is to make it possible for many who could not obtain insurance at all (at any price), outside of a group plan, to do so.

reply to post by Phage


I think I found where the problem lies - States don't have a deadline and the one we are in expects a large gap for those who fall into the grey area (don't qualify for subsidies nor Medicaid). She cannot get Medicaid because she has no child and makes a couple thousand too much. I would make too much but my child may qualify, which would reduce his insurance (have always had insurance for him).

As long as there is no fine or law breaking going on by not having it I think people will be fine (that was our phone discussion this morning - worried about this deadline).

I still go with the best solution being to lower the cost of medical care with no more 110.00 Tylenol from the ER or the like. Medical facilities need and deserve the income (overhead, specialized, etc) but if the government could help out on that end it might make things less complicated and cheaper. Anyway - thanks for the input. I feel I get it now (not really...but enough to not worry).

reply to post by Dianec


This is part of the problem that a lot of people are running into. Your friend is getting those results because the original law called for all states to expand Medicaid to everybody earning less than the federal poverty line (roughly 11,500). When the Supreme Court struck the mandatory expansion of Medicaid down, only about half of states still went through with it. Problem was, they never patched the law.

There are a lot of people in states that chose to not expand Medicaid to all people under the federal poverty line that are simply having to go without. Fortunately, they are also exempt from having to purchase the insurance on the exchanges.

Bottom line: The subsidies are for those making between 1 and 4 times the federal poverty line. At roughly 11,000 a year in income, your friend falls below that line and isn't eligible.

Dianec
reply to post by F4guy

 

Did you put it in for Montana? Would this mean she would get it in the form of a tax refurnd? I'll try it again using my income info (or close to what I think it will be).

The ACA is Federal. Except for the Medicaid expansion provisions, it doesn'ot matter what state you live in for the subsidy provisions. And it's not a refund. It is the part of the monthly premium the feds pay for.

Ive been paying ~$80 a month for insurance, have deductibles, paying for prescriptions, etc and got a letter the beginning of march saying my employer is terminating part time insurance and I would have to get a new insurance plan, they gave the website and I did the application and the only thing I qualified for was medicaid. Now all my healthcare, prescriptions, etc are 100% covered, which dont get me wrong im not complaining, but here I was getting along just fine paying for insurance and now the government is paying for it and they wonder why theyre in debt....

F4guy

Dianec
reply to post by F4guy

 

Did you put it in for Montana? Would this mean she would get it in the form of a tax refurnd? I'll try it again using my income info (or close to what I think it will be).

The ACA is Federal. Except for the Medicaid expansion provisions, it doesn'ot matter what state you live in for the subsidy provisions. And it's not a refund. It is the part of the monthly premium the feds pay for.

Not entirely accurate.

Even though you are using the "Federal" website, they still ask for your State.

That's because insurance companies can't sell policies beyond state lines (although the big insurance companies sell in multiple states, just not the same policies).

Each State approves policies for their State via State Insurance Commissions etc.

The ACA sets certain provisions for policies etc.

Keep in mind also that the entire "Subsidy" plan may be partly in jeopardy.....

Technical legal questions are in court.

While hundreds of people were rallying for religious liberty on a snowy day outside the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday, there were heated arguments inside a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals courtroom a few blocks away, both involving challenges to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.


The Circuit Court, with Judge Thomas. B. Griffith presiding, heard oral arguments in Halbig v. Sebelius about whether tax subsidies for health insurance can be distributed through exchanges established by the federal government.

Sec. 1311 of the Affordable Care Act says that health insurance subsidies are available only “through an Exchange established by the State.” The IRS, however, interpreted the statute to mean that the subsidies also could be distributed through federal exchanges in the 34 states that declined to create their own exchanges.


Court Will Decide If ACA Language Bars Health Subsidies In 34 States

ML8715
Ive been paying ~$80 a month for insurance, have deductibles, paying for prescriptions, etc and got a letter the beginning of march saying my employer is terminating part time insurance and I would have to get a new insurance plan, they gave the website and I did the application and the only thing I qualified for was medicaid. Now all my healthcare, prescriptions, etc are 100% covered, which dont get me wrong im not complaining, but here I was getting along just fine paying for insurance and now the government is paying for it and they wonder why theyre in debt....

That's actually a good story for the researchers out there who will most certainly be studying the impact of this whole thing on a larger economic level (likely hardships on a personal level too). Above we hear of those who cannot qualify for Medicaid but you can - and were able to afford the 80.00. Good example of what's wrong - but glad you are able to save 80.00 a month.

reply to post by xuenchen


That's pretty disturbing news because if the subsidies fall through it is going to devastate an untold number of people. I can't even imagine what that scenario would look like. We have to trust they wouldn't let it happen "after" the fact. Going forward maybe but no way on people who signed up or already lost coverage due to having to change over to this. What a mess.