reply to post by Circumstance
Such venom… I didn’t realize that you had some type of personal stake in this post other than an opinion unless, perhaps, you are the person who
penned the article from which you cite? I don’t believe that I lowered myself to calling you or anyone else names; I merely provided the facts, and
not dishonesty, after being in the benefits sector for over 25 years (working on the side of the insured and NOT the insurance carriers) and knowing
of what I speak. I’m curious about something – when the original language of the PPACA was released at 4:00 PM on a Friday afternoon, did you
spend that entire following weekend going through each of the 900+ pages of the law (nearly 1,300 pages if you include the various “summaries”
released at the same time)? No? Well, I did because that was part of my job so I could go through your comments, line by line, and cite the
provisions of the law to which I’m referring, but it’s obvious that this is a close-minded dialogue and I won’t waste any more of my time in
trying to lend some education to this discussion.
I will, however, remark on one comment you made; that being about HSAs, and I do so to correct the misinformation your comments might impress upon
other members who are reading this thread. The terms you used “unicorns” and “rainbows” truly made me chuckle because again, you have no idea
what you’re talking about. You obviously live in a section of the country that either a) has less expensive medical care or b) has less expensive
insurance premiums than the section in which I and many others reside. I shared with you the fact that I myself have had an HSA-qualified plan for
the last three years with a $2,500 deductible and 60/40 coinsurance. Perhaps you would be surprised to learn that where I live, the monthly premium
cost for this employer-sponsored plan is $520. That’s $6,240 annually PLUS the $2,500 deductible PLUS my 40% coinsurance. Conversely, a plan with
a $1,500 deductible and 80/20 coinsurance would cost in excess of $1,300 per month for single coverage (that equates to $15,600 in premiums alone).
There’s no question that I’m going to have medical expenses, so if my choice is to either PREPARE for that event by taking advantage of a
tax-sheltered HSA or just "winging it" when those medical bills come in and pray that I can scratch together the money to pay them, well call me a
fool if you want for taking advantage of the tax advantages afforded me by the HSA, but I’m perfectly comfortable with my informed decision. So as
you can see, your description of “unicorns” and “rainbows” has no place in this discussion –it is merely a matter of affordability for some
of us. And by the way, without these HSAs, which allow for both an in-network and out-of-network choice of healthcare under ACA, the HMO, which would
totally dictate from whom you are allowed to receive your healthcare, would reign supreme.
Lastly, an individual’s modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) has nothing to do with determining whether an employee contribution is taken on a pre
or post-tax basis. That is either a matter of tax law (as in the case of an HSA, FSA, etc.) or whether your employer has had the forethought to set
up a Section 125 POP plan (which would allow your insurance contributions to be deducted on a pre-tax basis). Either way, whatever amounts are
deducted from an individual’s MAGI for insurance purposes would lower the overall salary that is subject to federal and state income tax. I don’t
see how anyone can argue that having a lower net base from which your income taxes are calculated is in any way a bad thing.