I.R.S. Bars Employers From Dumping Workers Into Health Exchanges

Uh Oh.. This is definitely not how many employers had expected this part to go.

Many employers had thought they could shift health costs to the government by sending their employees to a health insurance exchange with a tax-free contribution of cash to help pay premiums, but the Obama administration has squelched the idea in a new ruling.

. . .

Such arrangements do not satisfy the health care law, the administration said, and employers may be subject to a tax penalty of $100 a day — or $36,500 a year — for each employee who goes into the individual marketplace.

I guess paying the penalty to let the workers get their own isn't much of an option anymore. Not for the large employers that fall within the guidelines. Wait.. There is more, I'm afraid.

Christopher E. Condeluci, a former tax and benefits counsel to the Senate Finance Committee, said the ruling was significant because it made clear that “an employee cannot use tax-free contributions from an employer to purchase an insurance policy sold in the individual health insurance market, inside or outside an exchange.”

If an employer wants to help employees buy insurance on their own, Mr. Condeluci said, it can give them higher pay, in the form of taxable wages. But in such cases, he said, the employer and the employee would owe payroll taxes on those wages, and the change could be viewed by workers as reducing a valuable benefit.

Source (Emphasis added)

Nope.. No choice to help your employees get alternate coverage ..in or out of the exchange. Wow... The Federal control of Health care would appear to be absolute and without much limit when they can make a new ruling or interpretation like this, whenever Federal balance sheets say they need to.

The noose keeps getting tighter! How is this acceptable?
I remember a time when other countries used to envy Americans, and their freedom. Now, they pity us.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000


This is starting to become a joke. Just do what the Japanese govt. did. Mandatory enrollment. If you can't pay, such as disability or loss of job, you are still covered. Make the rates based upon your income. Japan, currently tops the insurance premium you pay at around $6500 US dollars, regardless of how much you make income wise. There is no $5000 deductible before the insurance kicks in. NO DEDUCTIBLE at all. There is a 30% cost that you must pay from the total bill. There are caps that the medical industry can charge. It seems to be fair, many doctors are still in private practice and not living on the streets with their families. The PR that has gone into the Affordable Care Act seems to be all positive, but the results are starting to hit people in the pocket.

The health law, known as the Affordable Care Act, builds on the current system of employer-based health insurance. The administration, like many in Congress, wants employers to continue to provide coverage to workers and their families.

“I don’t think that an employer-based system is going to be, or should be, replaced anytime soon,” President Obama said recently, when asked if the law might speed the erosion of employer-sponsored insurance.

When employers provide coverage, their contributions, averaging more than $5,000 a year per employee, are not counted as taxable income to workers. But the Internal Revenue Service said employers could not meet their obligations under the health care law by simply reimbursing employees for some or all of their premium costs.

From the same article.

a reply to:Wrabbit2000
So what happens in October when my employer gets the news that our healthcare premiums will double?

This decision by the Obama Administration leaves businesses totally at the whims of the insurance companies. They have to continue providing coverage.... no matter what the cost?

Thanks to Emperor Obama for 'saving' us an average $2,500 per year!

Lately, every time I read something about the ACA, especially with changes made by the White House......I keep thinking of one line from Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back.....

"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further." -- President Obama...Darth Vader

When my employer is faced with huge increases in healthcare premium costs, what do you think will happen?
Be prepared to see huge increases in your deductible costs and co-pays.
It may affect how big your next raise in pay may be.... If you get one.
Do these idiots that voted for Obama have no foresight at all?

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

"Hope and Change is here America" - BHO on Inauguration Day speech...

All this is going to do is cause millions of people to lose their jobs or be put down to part time employment.

Either that or they'll be paying so much for their employer-based insurance that they won't be able to live.

I am usually for moderation in thoughts, words, and deeds, but enough is enough. This legislation has crossed the line into obscenely anti-business and is going to cause some catastrophic consequences for workers of all stripes.

As far as I'm concerned at this point, to be pro-Obamacare is to be anti-worker and pit oneself directly against the interests of 95% of your fellow citizens, including your own.

Wrabbit, in all the years I've been on ATS both trolling, ghosting, and a member, I deeply enjoy your political insights.

"If an employer wants to help employees buy insurance on their own, Mr. Condeluci said, it can give them higher pay, in the form of taxable wages. But in such cases, he said, the employer and the employee would owe payroll taxes on those wages, and the change could be viewed by workers as reducing a valuable benefit."

The title of the article is misleading. Employers CAN and WILL legally dump employees into the exchanges. It will still be cheaper for employers to pay the penalties and taxes associated with that, than it will be to provide Obamacare (with all its requirements) to their employees.

The title makes it seem as if large employers MUST keep providing company based health insurance to their employees, and that is not the case.

The problem I'm seeing is that the newly armed IRS may "take it there" and a guilty until innocent conundrum may occur, causing pissed off employers either to 1. close shop or 2. outsource if they can afford it.

Stick a fork in America, she's done.
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I think they are starting to realize that 0bama.Care is going to cause extreme debts.

Individuals and companies and the government taxpayers will all get klobbered.

The money has to come from somewhere.

Now who do you suppose will take the blunt end ?

The whole thing is a boondoggle.

Am I missing the downside to this? I don't see one.

Having said that, I think we'd be better off with a single-payer system.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

This is a means to an end dear readers. They want the stupid masses to beg and cry for change. The only way you can get them to beg is to take away standards of living.



I will say it again anyone making under 14 dollars and hour is screwed in the next few years. They will demand higher pay that can not be had. The system the progressive PTB have put in place will suck out the last remaining wealth. We will have only the super rich and the poor because of this inflation.

a reply to: links234

Anyone who says "I think single payer would be better" hasnt thought it through.. With our current system when a doctor or insurance company does you wrong you can get a lawyer an go after them.. You can also get a second independant opinion... With single payer you will have to take your dispute up with the IRS.. Good luck with that.. The government desides if you live or die and their say is final...

a reply to: Th1nker

You're right. How shortsighted of me. To think we could have any way to protect the consumers of the products that are offered.

Silly me.

originally posted by: Th1nker
a reply to: links234



Anyone who says "I think single payer would be better" hasnt thought it through.. With our current system when a doctor or insurance company does you wrong you can get a lawyer an go after them.. You can also get a second independant opinion... With single payer you will have to take your dispute up with the IRS.. Good luck with that.. The government desides if you live or die and their say is final...

Your entire post is propaganda and outright lies. You can have single payer insurance and private healthcare. I have government run (state) healthcare plan and I pay about $92 a month for medial and dental, comparable to a Silver level plan.

The ACA is horrendous though.

a reply to: butcherguy

I think that is a little detail the American people haven't really understood on all this yet because of all the confusion around the opening. This is a Cafeteria Plan on the full national level for enrollment "periods", which we aren't in anymore.

With that, comes a whole NEW rate sheet/data set, and as you note OH what a difference it's supposed to be, to replace the Individual Landscape set currently running healthcare.gov.

I think folks are in for a hard shock when that rate set comes public for the first time on the next enrollment period. This telling employers they'll pay $36,000 a year penalty for every employee who goes into the exchange system is chilling, but the prices they are faced with in that captive environment may be quite a thing to see too.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: butcherguy

I think that is a little detail the American people haven't really understood on all this yet because of all the confusion around the opening. This is a Cafeteria Plan on the full national level for enrollment "periods", which we aren't in anymore.

With that, comes a whole NEW rate sheet/data set, and as you note OH what a difference it's supposed to be, to replace the Individual Landscape set currently running healthcare.gov.

I think folks are in for a hard shock when that rate set comes public for the first time on the next enrollment period. This telling employers they'll pay $36,000 a year penalty for every employee who goes into the exchange system is chilling, but the prices they are faced with in that captive environment may be quite a thing to see too.

it wouldd be easier to fire the person istead of incurring penalties me thinks

originally posted by: manna2
it would be easier to fire the person istead of incurring penalties me thinks

Firing is one way... Restructuring the 'work-week' is another.
But - a method that is getting more and more use, these days, is - "contracting".
The employer legally loses some of what was formerly available to them in the Whip-Cracking Slave Master role...but, they find ways of getting the same (and better) results...with the services of Attorneys experienced in such matters (the contracts are onerous at best).
Now - if you want to work... You sign the contract... Quite often, you must start your own business, get a $Million-or-more liability policy, get bonded, and any number of other hoops...just to get the contract (placed on the Approved Vendors list)... You are no longer an 'employee'.
Now - they don't "fire" you. They just say - "hey - we've changed direction - Bye"
...They don't have to worry about employee-relations (as regards you), either...
Etcetera...

Since the start of and passing of AHCA, or Obamacare, there has been problems, fraud and lies told to the people. Those for the bill sold this to companies and the people, however, they failed to reveal all of it. And when it did pass, and the biggest businesses, following the law, posted what was considered to be politically inconvienent, those in support started to worry about such.

In short the people were given a bad law, and to fix it, they keep changing the rules. Kind of like a game, where the rules change on a moment to moment basis. First it was one thing, then another. And if you are so favored, you get a pass, and a blessing not to partake. All the while, those who forced us to take it, choose not to partake themselves.

And now that the horse has left the barn, the government is trying to close the barn door and say the horse is inside of it. What businesses have done, is in short made it where people chose to go take the new Obamacare insurance, rather than keep them on the roles, and this is partly due to the insurance companies wanting a bigger chunk of money.

I am waiting for the government to have to go back to court to defend the new decisions and changes before the courts again.