Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For a long period of time I nor my kids had health insurance. Couldn't afford a private policy. I did purchase the school insurance package for roughly 20$ thankfully because one broke his arm. If we were sick we went to the health department. They charge on a sliding scale according to income or we went to a clinic or I went to the university infirmary. Anything more serious we made payments.
Back then they didnt have all these assistance programs paid for by tax dollars or if they did no one told me. We did just fine.
The only problem I saw that need to be addressed pre OBC was preexisting condition coverage and the expensive cost of cobra.
I agree that there has to be some mechanism that allows for coverage of pre-existing conditions and I also think that there has to be some provisions that make it unfair to revoke coverage based on extensive medical needs, but I don't think that the solution is to shift the cost burden to other healthier people either.
I think there is a penalty for people with company healthcare plan. I never understood why? But our salaries are adjusted little bit as soon as Obamacare went into a law. Any reason why?
My company had incredible health insurance coverage. A Cadillac Plan, as termed by Obamacare, that covered everything 100%, including prescriptions, and there was nothing taken out of our paycheck to pay for premiums and there were no deductibles. That was before 2009 when that was taken away from us and an HSA was the replacement. Why? Because under Obamacare, companies were penalized (taxed) for providing too good of a health care plan to their employees.
A lot of pro-Obamacare lefties were in for a rude awakening when they realized that by the time their baby was due, it would no longer mean 100% covered and no costs incurred by the birth, but now, because of Obamacare penalties, those soon to be parents would have to shell out $4500 - $6500 to cover the deductible of their plan before getting 80% coverage.
But remember, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.
Worse yet, you have some Professional Tax Preparers, say H&R Block, that do not have the updated tax software and have to complete line 61. In this case, a couple were fined $695 each, so they were fined $1,390 and this was taken immediately from their owed refund and their refund was now $30. The bigger question is if the IRS will refund it back to them, because the mandate was in dispute January 20, 2017 and they filed taxes just a week ago.
Look at this: This grew pretty ugly with these penalties... Note the Penalty is "each" spouse.
Penalty
(Single) Penalty $695 or 2.5% of income
(Family)$2,085 or 2.5% of income
2016 $695 or 2.5% of income $2,085 or 2.5% of income
What I want to know is: With this EO, do we no longer need to file the 1099H? Do we ignore any IRS questions about health coverage?
Well, according to the IRS, they will ignore line 61. This means your return will not be rejected by leaving the question out, "Did you have health insurance?" (not exact words but close, I don't have a tax form in front of me) and you may ignore that portion of your tax form. The problem I see, is that professional tax preparers might not have the updated software in their system and they continue to require you to answer the question because the computer will not let you "advance" to the next question (because the software is now defunct). I would ask your tax preparer or if you plan on doing your own taxes, I would ignore the question on line 61. That part is fact.
My company had incredible health insurance coverage. A Cadillac Plan, as termed by Obamacare, that covered everything 100%, including prescriptions, and there was nothing taken out of our paycheck to pay for premiums and there were no deductibles. That was before 2009 when that was taken away from us and an HSA was the replacement. Why? Because under Obamacare, companies were penalized (taxed) for providing too good of a health care plan to their employees.
A lot of pro-Obamacare lefties were in for a rude awakening when they realized that by the time their baby was due, it would no longer mean 100% covered and no costs incurred by the birth, but now, because of Obamacare penalties, those soon to be parents would have to shell out $4500 - $6500 to cover the deductible of their plan before getting 80% coverage.
But remember, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.
Yeah, hate to tell you this but the Cadillac tax was supposed to go into effect in 2018, so whatever was done seems to be on your company. Since no other cost control mechanism had any chance to pass, I guess this one was some sort of attempt to force everybody to have "skin" in the game, so not to overuse healthcare and lower cost. And the tax was supposed to be only on the amount that exceeded a very large annual limit.
Btw, when was that magical time pre-obamacare when the child birth was free because my recollection is quite different.
And yes, I have the same employer sponsored plan with ever rising deductibles/copays/premiums. The two changes were no cost preventive care and no life time limit.
The problem is the idea of national health care system.
Things were working before the current ACA.
Where does any funding come from. Taxes. We are being taxed now to cover health care for those with low income. Extend that funding to cover those with pre-existing conditions. That is what our state medical program does. Before my small company offered health insurance coverage we had two employees, one with diabetes and the other diagnosed with some bipolar disorder. Neither could get private coverage because their conditions were considered preexisting, therefore they qualified for coverage under TNcare. Due to their income they still paid a monthly premium but could not be denied coverage.
Not so. Most plans have choices of coverage and companies decide on the best fit for their employees. Maternity was once considered a rider not a requirement. If you have no employees of childbearing age why are you required to cover maternity. If no employee has children why are you required to cover pediatrics. If you are young and healthy why cant you choose catastrophic coverage.
Insurance coverage should be an individuals choice not something dictated by the government.
Your state has universal health care for all, the people presently covered by ACA.
There are people that were dropped from their plans and had no reasonable option, they couldn't afford to buy into a new plan. How are you going to cover those people.
Removing funding from healthy people is not an accomplishment and will end up with taxpayers covering more of the costs of the ACA. His promise was immediate repeal of the ACA and replacement, he has not fulfilled that promise, all he has done is drive up the federal budget. By the way they don't have a replacement for the ACA, maybe you missed that rather important nuance.
I do NOT require you to pay for your own bridge, then turn around and tax you to pay for other people to use that bridge.
I addressed that. Quit ranting and read.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Note the Penalty is "each" spouse. 
