Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-03-2013, 07:12 AM   #21
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 8,645
I initially assumed the Administration was caving to business interests but then I read Ezra Klien's article on the issue. It is clear from the article that the Administration realizes that this aspect of the law is bad policy and could undermine the very things the ACA purports to further. He recommends that the employer penalty be repealed rather than delayed but lets face reality, there is no way this Congress will pass changes that would make the ACA work better. That won't happen unless and until it becomes apparent to all that the ACA is here to stay. As for the scary failure to implement aspects, I agree they are a bit scary but the Administration says that the IRS and other agencies frequently hold back enforcement of troublesome provisions. It seems to me that calls for Justice to announce that they will leave CA medical marijuana clinics and growers alone fall into the same category.
__________________

__________________
Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson
donheff is online now  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 07-03-2013, 07:18 AM   #22
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,437
A big reason to delay ER for many is the uncertainty surrounding ACA. However I doubt it will be straightened out antime soon. So for me at least there's going to be a big leap of faith at some jumping off point.
__________________

__________________
Retired in 2016. Living off dividends / interest and a mini pension. Freedom.
foxfirev5 is offline  
Old 07-03-2013, 07:41 AM   #23
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Marco island
Posts: 813
Any business that has 50 or more employees can simply call any of the insurance companies that serve their area. They will be more than happy to get them up and running in full compliance with the law. And it most likely would be done by Monday. This is just more silliness.
__________________
Gatordoc50 is offline  
Old 07-03-2013, 07:48 AM   #24
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
I initially assumed the Administration was caving to business interests but then I read Ezra Klien's article on the issue. It is clear from the article that the Administration realizes that this aspect of the law is bad policy and could undermine the very things the ACA purports to further. He recommends that the employer penalty be repealed rather than delayed but lets face reality, there is no way this Congress will pass changes that would make the ACA work better. That won't happen unless and until it becomes apparent to all that the ACA is here to stay. As for the scary failure to implement aspects, I agree they are a bit scary but the Administration says that the IRS and other agencies frequently hold back enforcement of troublesome provisions. It seems to me that calls for Justice to announce that they will leave CA medical marijuana clinics and growers alone fall into the same category.
Interesting article, thanks for the link. Ezra Klein (and Sarah Kliff) add value to the health care discussion.

So, technically, enforcement and penalty are being deferred.
__________________
MichaelB is online now  
Old 07-03-2013, 08:09 AM   #25
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Marco island
Posts: 813
Well then let's be clear. The deferral is due to bad policy and not to employer inability to meet the deadline.
__________________
Gatordoc50 is offline  
Old 07-03-2013, 09:34 AM   #26
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Nodak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cavalier
Posts: 2,317
It also puts the deadline conveniently after the 2014 election.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent." Pogo Possum (Walt Kelly)
Nodak is offline  
Old 07-03-2013, 11:54 PM   #27
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
It would seem that if employers are being relieved of their obligations for a year that the requirements for individuals to purchase coverage (the "individual mandate") would also be pushed back.

Congress approved a law with many provisions and with implementation dates for those provisions. I'm not quite clear on why the executive branch gets to modify either these provisions or their effective dates. I guess someone would have to sue to get this addressed--and who is going to do that?
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now  
Old 07-04-2013, 01:37 AM   #28
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,423
First it was bad law and now, it's they aren't implementing it fast enough?
__________________
explanade is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 05:53 AM   #29
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 8,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
It would seem that if employers are being relieved of their obligations for a year that the requirements for individuals to purchase coverage (the "individual mandate") would also be pushed back.
i don't see why since the individual mandate doesn't present similar problems.
__________________
Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson
donheff is online now  
Old 07-04-2013, 08:51 AM   #30
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
i don't see why since the individual mandate doesn't present similar problems.
We'll know more about that if we see how the exchanges are implemented.

If big employers aren't required to cover their employees until 2015 (or properly document it), presumably those people were counting on that coverage, not buying their own policies. So, now there will (presumably) be yet more pressure on the exchanges (and the govt subsidy program.

This was sold as an integrated package. The parts are falling away (SHOP for small businesses, lack of timely info for consumers to utilize exchanges, now the delay of the entire "large employer" employer mandate). Why not keep it integrated and delay everything until 2015?

Frankly, it looks like amateur hour in DC.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now  
Old 07-04-2013, 08:54 AM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
First it was bad law and now, it's they aren't implementing it fast enough?
Even a bad law could have been competently implemented.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now  
Old 07-04-2013, 09:02 AM   #32
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
There is no "bad" or "good" law. There is "one" law that applies to everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by explanade View Post
First it was bad law and now, it's they aren't implementing it fast enough?
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 09:12 AM   #33
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by obgyn65 View Post
There is no "bad" or "good" law. There is "one" law that applies to everyone.
This has to be the most meaningless statement I've ever read. Of course there are good and bad laws (mostly bad). And they never apply to everyone. Almost every law passed excludes members of Congress. Including ACA.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 09:50 AM   #34
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
Quite a subjective statement. Have you ever heard of the concept of the universality of the law ? Laws have been created and refined by societies to protect us from each other. Start there : Universal jurisdiction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Agreed that ACA will not apply to everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by harley View Post
This has to be the most meaningless statement I've ever read. Of course there are good and bad laws (mostly bad). And they never apply to everyone. Almost every law passed excludes members of Congress. Including ACA.
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 09:51 AM   #35
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 8,645
Quote:
Originally Posted by harley View Post
This has to be the most meaningless statement I've ever read. Of course there are good and bad laws (mostly bad). And they never apply to everyone. Almost every law passed excludes members of Congress. Including ACA.
members of Congress have to purchase health plans from the public exchanges for their states. How does that exclude them?
__________________
Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson
donheff is online now  
Old 07-04-2013, 10:52 AM   #36
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by samclem View Post
It would seem that if employers are being relieved of their obligations for a year that the requirements for individuals to purchase coverage (the "individual mandate") would also be pushed back.

Congress approved a law with many provisions and with implementation dates for those provisions. I'm not quite clear on why the executive branch gets to modify either these provisions or their effective dates. I guess someone would have to sue to get this addressed--and who is going to do that?
I sure wouldn't mind to be relieved one more year of avoiding the financial costs of the mandate. But don't expect me to be the one to sue. I am not going to spend a million dollars in lawyers fees to save $5k in health premiums.
__________________
Mulligan is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 10:56 AM   #37
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by obgyn65 View Post
Quite a subjective statement. Have you ever heard of the concept of the universality of the law ? Laws have been created and refined by societies to protect us from each other. Start there : Universal jurisdiction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Concept is one thing, application is a completely different issue. If you haven't seen examples in this every day you aren't paying attention. Just look at the difference in arrests or sentencing based on race. Or any application of law toward the rich as opposed to the poor. Or police vs. non-police. Or hundreds of other examples. And politicians quite often exempt themselves from the laws that the rest of us have to live with. How often have non-politicians been able to get their names removed from the No-Fly list?

Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
members of Congress have to purchase health plans from the public exchanges for their states. How does that exclude them?
You're right, I'm wrong about this one. I do remember it being an issue at one point, but the Grassley Amendment made sure Congress and staff have to follow the same rules (this time). But I've also read that many people expect a mass wave of resignations before Dec. 31 so that federal workers, both representatives and staffers, will still get to be covered under the old federal insurance plan. I'll be curious to see if that really happens.

None of this really matters, though. I just get pissed off at political maneuvering, which is all putting the requirement off until after the next election is. Sorry for the dangling participle.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 11:01 AM   #38
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nodak View Post
It also puts the deadline conveniently after the 2014 election.
Yep...... It's all about votes.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline  
Old 07-04-2013, 11:06 AM   #39
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,477
Getting back on topic (and hoping we can stay there) it seems Htown Harry had a point. Not much has changed, employers that would have been fined get another year. The exchanges, which have been the real point of focus for us here, are not affected by the delay.

Members of congress and their staffs are indeed affected by the law, as Donheff pointed out, and this has turned into a real headache for them. The healthcare benefit they receive today is subsidized, and they cannot get a similar subsidy at the exchange. They can get a pay increase to offset that, but because it is not fuly deductible, their after tax income would fall.
__________________
MichaelB is online now  
Old 07-04-2013, 11:09 AM   #40
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
Don't even start me about rich vs poor and racial or ethnic matters. I am an immigrant in the US and I cleaned tables at MCdonalds as a student during the early 90s. And like many I have been treated like crap from US patients because I have a different accent. I do know what unequal treatment feels like, believe me .
Quote:
Originally Posted by harley View Post

Concept is one thing, application is a completely different issue. If you haven't seen examples in this every day you aren't paying attention. Just look at the difference in arrests or sentencing based on race. Or any application of law toward the rich as opposed to the poor. Or police vs. non-police. Or hundreds of other examples. And politicians quite often exempt themselves from the laws that the rest of us have to live with. How often have non-politicians been able to get their names removed from the No-Fly list?
.
__________________

__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:16 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.