Colorado Health Exchange now online

[MichaelB]

A preliminary version of the Colorado health care exchange is up and running. Home | Connect for Health Colorado. No policy specifics, but there is a calculator and some helpful information.

 

[heeyy_joe]

Easy to use too.

 

[RockyMtn]

My live in gf of 5 years is currently on Cobra for another year or so. When Obamacare kicks in will her eligibility be based on her income (which is zero) or our combined HH income? I'm covered through former employer coverage.

 

[rbmrtn]

My live in gf of 5 years is currently on Cobra for another year or so. When Obamacare kicks in will her eligibility be based on her income (which is zero) or our combined HH income? I'm covered through former employer coverage.

Not for sure but I am guessing it's going to be related to whether you claim her as a dependent for tax purposes. See the section on Family Size in the link

26 USC § 5000A - Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage | Title 26 - Internal Revenue Code | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute


(A) Family size
The family size involved with respect to any taxpayer shall be equal to the number of individuals for whom the taxpayer is allowed a deduction under section 151 (relating to allowance of deduction for personal exemptions) for the taxable year.

In this document, look at the comparison for an unmarried couple. They assume two individual policies versus a family policy for a married couple

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41137.pdf

 

[donheff]

It does look easy to use although the actual purchase component will be the hard part. No telling how far along they are on that.

 

[gerrym51]

Not for sure but I am guessing it's going to be related to whether you claim her as a dependent for tax purposes. See the section on Family Size in the link

26 USC § 5000A - Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage | Title 26 - Internal Revenue Code | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute


(A) Family size
The family size involved with respect to any taxpayer shall be equal to the number of individuals for whom the taxpayer is allowed a deduction under section 151 (relating to allowance of deduction for personal exemptions) for the taxable year.

In this document, look at the comparison for an unmarried couple. They assume two individual policies versus a family policy for a married couple

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41137.pdf

if you don't file a joint return you are single under PPACA

 

[RockyMtn]

if you don't file a joint return you are single under PPACA

We each file single. Suppose now that she is not working I could list her as a dependent and then file "head of household".

If she files next year as single with zero income I guess she'd qualify for Medicaid.

 

[ziggy29]

We each file single. Suppose now that she is not working I could list her as a dependent and then file "head of household".

If she files next year as single with zero income I guess she'd qualify for Medicaid.

If this is (a) allowed and (b) results in considerable savings over filing jointly, I wouldn't plan on keeping this deal for long. I suppose the first couple of years will uncover the significant "unintended consequences" and loopholes that need to be closed. That's the way sweeping legislation usually works -- not all unintended consequences can be discovered before observing the law in action.

 

[ziggy29]

looks like another form of the marriage tax!

Without debating the politics of it, I think people should be mindful of the potential for how something could change in the future would impact them. For example, right now PPACA subsidies, like SS and Medicare, are not subject to assets tests; any current means-testing on them are income-based and not assets-based. This makes a *current* strategy feasible where one engineers a retirement based on accumulating a lot of assets and living off of the already taxed assets instead of generating taxable income.

While I wouldn't make political predictions here about what will happen, or posturing about what I think *should* happen, I do think it's still prudent to plan for the future in a way that is prepared to handle asset-based means testing on these programs if they come.

 

[RockyMtn]

Not for sure but I am guessing it's going to be related to whether you claim her as a dependent for tax purposes. See the section on Family Size in the link

26 USC § 5000A - Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage | Title 26 - Internal Revenue Code | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute


(A) Family size
The family size involved with respect to any taxpayer shall be equal to the number of individuals for whom the taxpayer is allowed a deduction under section 151 (relating to allowance of deduction for personal exemptions) for the taxable year.

In this document, look at the comparison for an unmarried couple. They assume two individual policies versus a family policy for a married couple

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41137.pdf

Thanks, seems that the two single folks do better than the married couple. The marriage tax rears it's head again!

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Isn't that just the same calculator and rates now as the Berkeley one?

 

[MichaelB]

Great links from rbmrtn. Those CRS reports are excellent and always informative. Thanks!

We each file single. Suppose now that she is not working I could list her as a dependent and then file "head of household".

If she files next year as single with zero income I guess she'd qualify for Medicaid.

As a single person, she has to apply for an individual policy at the state health exchange. As your tax dependent that might (would probably?) require her to declare your total household income to determine eligibility for premium support. She is not automatically eligible for Medicaid unless your state has implemented the new eligibility criteria. That's something you probably want to check.

Duh brainfart. You live in Colorado, which has passed the new Medicaid expansion. She is eligible for Medicaid.

 

[MichaelB]

Any chance we can keep this thread focused on the Colorado exchange for now? Members are welcome to start their own threads to post general comments about the PPACA.

Edit: I started a new thread and will move a couple of the new posts there.

 

[RockyMtn]

Great links from rbmrtn. Those CRS reports are excellent and always informative. Thanks!



As a single person, she has to apply for an individual policy at the state health exchange. As your tax dependent that might (would probably?) require her to declare your total household income to determine eligibility for premium support. She is not automatically eligible for Medicaid unless your state has implemented the new eligibility criteria. That's something you probably want to check.

Duh brainfart. You live in Colorado, which has passed the new Medicaid expansion. She is eligible for Medicaid.

I'm going to have to get a lot smarter on this Colorado exchange. When I run the numbers through using me as head of household and her as a dependent it comes in at $600 per month (about the same as gf's cobra) when I just run her through with her basically $0 income it comes back with "Medicaid". Big difference.

 

[Packman]

I get confused by the term "tax credit". Assuming our income is about $60k, the calculator shows a tax credit of $945/month for DW and I. It says you can use this credit immediately to reduce your premium. However, our federal income tax will only be a few thousand dollars as we will have little income other than cap gains and dividends - which are taxed at zero since we would be in the 15% tax bracket.

So, would we really be ablt to use the $945 to reduce our premium?

 

[ziggy29]

I get confused by the term "tax credit". Assuming our income is about $60k, the calculator shows a tax credit of $945/month for DW and I. It says you can use this credit immediately to reduce your premium. However, our federal income tax will only be a few thousand dollars as we will have little income other than cap gains and dividends - which are taxed at zero since we would be in the 15% tax bracket.

So, would we really be ablt to use the $945 to reduce our premium?

Reduced by $945 a month at $60K? I can't believe that unless you have 5-6 kids who are covered as dependents.

Our own situation says that as a couple with no kids, age 48 and 45 (as we will be on 1/1/2014), with a $30K income we'd pay about $150 a month and get a subsidy of about $800. So if we'd get a subsidy of $800 I'm not sure how you'd get one of $945 with a $60K income unless it was because of several dependents.

 

[Accidental Retiree]

Our own situation says that as a couple with no kids, age 48 and 45 (as we will be on 1/1/2014), with a $30K income we'd pay about $150 a month and get a subsidy of about $800. So if we'd get a subsidy of $800 I'm not sure how you'd get one of $945 with a $60K income unless it was because of several dependents.

Z29, I used the Covered California calculator and got similar results. DH and me, ages 60 and 58, no kids, income at $60k, premium of $1516, tax credit of $1041.

When I put your income and ages into the CA calculator, I also got similar results to yours.

 

[eridanus]

Oregon also has their rates online.

http://www.oregonhealthrates.org/

For an individual 40 year old in Portland, the bronze cost is just north of ~$200. That's not much different than an HDHP plan with a $5000 deductible.

 

[FUEGO]

I noticed the Colorado website says High Deductible plans will be available. It will be interesting to see actual options with specific plan details and costs.

 

[Mulligan]

Oregon also has their rates online.

http://www.oregonhealthrates.org/

For an individual 40 year old in Portland, the bronze cost is just north of ~$200. That's not much different than an HDHP plan with a $5000 deductible.

Thanks for the post.. This is the rate friendliest one I have seen yet. I am almost 50 so I split the difference and estimate to be around $300 a month. Close to a 300% increase over what I am currently paying for similar coverage. But, I definitely prefer getting gouged, more than I do abused, so my budget could absorb that rate. I would hope MO wouldn't cost more than Oregon, so this is an encouraging sign for me.

 

[bubblehead]

Thanks for the post.. This is the rate friendliest one I have seen yet. I am almost 50 so I split the difference and estimate to be around $300 a month. Close to a 300% increase over what I am currently paying for similar coverage. But, I definitely prefer getting gouged, more than I do abused, so my budget could absorb that rate. I would hope MO wouldn't cost more than Oregon, so this is an encouraging sign for me.

an actual oregon rate card



http://media.oregonlive.com/health_impact/other/portland_individual.pdf


and whats covered

http://www.oregonhealthrates.org/files/plan_summary.pdf

 

[Live And Learn]

While I wouldn't make political predictions here about what will happen, or posturing about what I think *should* happen, I do think it's still prudent to plan for the future in a way that is prepared to handle asset-based means testing on these programs if they come.

+1

I've based my budget off of of the rates for a 64 year old and a 60 year old (we will be 55 / 50 when I retire). I end up with a 3.8% WR but still get 100% in FIRECalc (and 90% in FIDO RIP) for 40 years. If we continue to be covered through DH's work at current subsidized amounts, or if we get an Obamacare subsidy it will be "gravy", which I will probably leave invested to give me more cushion. If it looks like the cushion is too big in 5 years time I'll consider spending some of it, but not until then.

 

[MichaelB]

The deadline has passed for insurers to submit plans. According to the Colorado Division of Insurance, 11 insurers submitted "hundreds of plans" for review. The press release here http://cdn.colorado.gov/cs/Satellit...goBlobs&blobwhere=1251855336103&ssbinary=true

KFF news blurb here 11 Insurers Want To Play Ball In Colorado’s Marketplace – Capsules - The KHN Blog

Denver – The Colorado Division of Insurance is reviewing hundreds of proposed new health insurance plans designed to offer coverage to consumers and small businesses starting January 1, 2014. The new plans must meet certain federal requirements for benefits and premiums, as outlined in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This includes health plans sold through Connect for Health Colorado, the state’s new health insurance marketplace. It opens on October 1, 2013, offering plans that begin in 2014.

 

[brewer12345]

Sounds promising to me. More competition means more options and a real market, which are good things.