Poll:If the Healthcare Insurance Subsidy was removed, would it affect you & family?

[ShokWaveRider]

Poll, Please only respond to the poll if you use the ACA for health insurance.

Currently a lot of people are in the ACA because they get a subsidy based on their income. For my family if it was no more, we simply could not afford to buy healthcare insurance here in the USA. Thankfully, We do not qualify for Medicaid (I really feel for those folks).

The subsidy is rarely discussed, just Medicaid expansion and the high insurance costs are in the headlines. Yes our insurance this year went up, BUT so did our subsidy and the total cost to us per month was actually less than last year. Yes we did have to change our GP, but all our specialists were in plan. I would rather change my doc and have one as opposed to not having any insurance at all.

I am curious ho many other folks here are in a similar boat.

[outdoorgirl02]

We buy our own insurance but don't qualify for the subsidy based on our income. So, the subsidy part would not affect us but if they got rid of the pre-existing conditions exemption, it would crush us. I have multiple chronic health issues and can't imagine not being able to get insurance because of those.

[COcheesehead]

Paul Rand was just forshadowing what's to come: deductibility of your payment, HSA's, group association purchases are some. Maybe in the end without a subsidy it's a wash. I'll wait and see.

[ShokWaveRider]

Quote:

Originally Posted by COcheesehead Paul Rand was just forshadowing what's to come: deductibility of your payment, HSA's, group association purchases are some. Maybe in the end without a subsidy it's a wash. I'll wait and see.

Somehow I think that would not be the case for us. We do not have an HSA nor want one. Currently our Insurance payment is about $1700 PM before subsidy, after subsidy it is $150pm. I cannot see a tax credit for $18600 pa when our income/MAGI is only $33,000 in retirement. That math does not work. How can one get a tax credit for a 10 x the taxes one pays to start with. these numbers are not exact but within 10% of actual.

[Sunset]

A subsidy is worth 4 -> 10 times what a deduction is worth, so I don't see how Paul Rands idea would be good, except for people who don't get a subsidy.

Oh, wait, medical expenses and payments are already deductible, so nothing new there.

[CRLLS]

How can over $14,000/year subsidy not affect a family's situation? Not saying that we can't pay for it or there would not be other options. However it would certainly take away from something else. For us this year (same company/same plan) would have gone up a couple hundred AFTER the new subsidy was applied. In addition, the deductible went up and overall coverage would have gone down. We chose a different plan. as DW goes to Medicare early this year. I join Medicare later this year. If we still had a few years to go, I'm not sure what our choice would have been.

[MRG]

Can't do the poll.

DW is covered by Medicare so just for me. I have preexisting conditions but assuming that I can buy it, great. I've been using the subsidies but I'll do Roth conversions instead.

[Sunset]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider Somehow I think that would not be the case for us. We do not have an HSA nor want one. Currently our Insurance payment is about $1700 PM before subsidy, after subsidy it is $150pm. I cannot see a tax credit for $18600 pa when our income/MAGI is only $33,000 in retirement. That math does not work. How can one get a tax credit for a 10 x the taxes one pays to start with. these numbers are not exact but within 10% of actual.

I think you made a typo..
a deduction is not a tax credit. A tax credit is like cash refund, a deduction just reduces your taxable income.

[razztazz]

I notice the most free marketeery of the free marketeers seem obsessed with complicating and obscuring the system even more that it has been. All manner of if's and's and but's, and more uncertainties. Not efficient or transparent at all

[DEC-1982]

I don't start in the ACA till June, so I won't vote in the poll, but I can tell you that my rates will be significantly higher without the ACA, based on the research I have done so far.

[AllDone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by outdoorgirl02 We buy our own insurance but don't qualify for the subsidy based on our income. So, the subsidy part would not affect us but if they got rid of the pre-existing conditions exemption, it would crush us. I have multiple chronic health issues and can't imagine not being able to get insurance because of those.

Same here. Sooner or later everybody has a pre-existing condition. I need a knee replacement. "Needs a surgery" as well as "osteoarthritis" are pre-existing conditions, but very, very common. My BIL was born with a bicuspid aortic valve which occurs in 10% of the population. He's completely healthy, but uninsurable on the individual market prior to the ACA.

My premium is high, but still lower than what we were paying for COBRA before the ACA. This year's increase was minimal especially compared to my employer's 27% increase in 2007.

With all the fuss and bother about subsidies, it's worth pointing out that insurance received through an employer is paid for with pre-tax dollars while those of us buying insurance through the individual market receive little or no (mostly no) tax break.

[W2R]

Wouldn't affect me at all. Like most US citizens over 65, I am on Medicare. F does not have to deal with ACA insurance either since he has other insurance that is deemed adequate.

[AllDone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by razztazz I notice the most free marketeery of the free marketeers seem obsessed with complicating and obscuring the system even more that it has been. All manner of if's and's and but's, and more uncertainties. Not efficient or transparent at all

I nearly had a stroke on Friday after calling my rep's office to ask about the ACA. They had me talk to the "healthcare soecialist" who proved to be clueless about how the health care system works, about how health insurance works, about the actual provisions of the ACA, about the results of previous attempts to provide guaranteed issue, about access to Medicaid, or about how Schedule A handles insurance expenses. I'm a physician, I have economics and math degrees, I'm an ACA buff, and I prepare taxes as an AARP/VITA volunteer. I may not be the sharpest tool in the drawer, but I have a pretty deep understanding about this one subject. This particular policy maker could not have been more clueless.

[easysurfer]

Way to soon to speculate about where the ball lands. As even if the subsidy was removed, I don't expect the rest of the ACA to stay as is. But I answerd as though the subsidy is the only change and put down, yes, impacted greatly.

[COcheesehead]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sunset A subsidy is worth 4 -> 10 times what a deduction is worth, so I don't see how Paul Rands idea would be good, except for people who don't get a subsidy. Oh, wait, medical expenses and payments are already deductible, so nothing new there.

^^^not true unless they they are 10% of your AGI or 7.5% if you are over 65.
https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc502.html

[athena53]

Quote:

Originally Posted by outdoorgirl02 We buy our own insurance but don't qualify for the subsidy based on our income. So, the subsidy part would not affect us but if they got rid of the pre-existing conditions exemption, it would crush us. I have multiple chronic health issues and can't imagine not being able to get insurance because of those.

Same here- bought from healthcare.gov but not eligible for subsidies. My main concern is also pre-existing conditions even though I'm in very good health. Borderline high cholesterol (due partly to high "good cholesterol") but I'm on zero prescriptions and do an hour of cardio every day. Colonoscopies have not been perfect but I should be fine as long as I have repeats done when recommended, and I do. Even those factors might make me ineligible or raise my premiums to crazy levels.

[Sue J]

Losing the current subsidy would impact us greatly. But I run our financial lives with safety nets and buffer zones.

On Nov 9th I came up with "what if" scenarios and back up plans. If we lost the subsidy we could still make it work through 2017 if we could keep our current ACA policies. Then for 2018 DH could get back on his retiree insurance and I would look at whatever the "replacement option" turns out to be. I could also get back into the retiree plan but the cost of that is currently $1067/mo just for a spouse. Add another $200-$300/mo for DH (he would get a nice allowance) and we'd be paying 43% of our income just for health insurance premiums.

DH left the retiree plan in 2014 because the cost was so high and we got a better subsidy with both of us buying insurance through ACA (2 people needing insurance vs 1 person with same household income).

So, what's the back-up plan? I turn 62 next month. I had planned to wait to collect Soc Sec (currently estimated at $577/mo) until Medicare age because 16% of any additional income would just go to health insurance costs due to reduced subsidy. If my premium costs are no longer based on our income then that changes one of the deciding factors on taking Soc Sec. Also, my part time income of $4500-$5000/year has been going into a Trad IRA to keep it non-taxable for ACA MAGI. I could change that if needed.

We have other areas where we could cut expenses, although we already live on a very low budget. We have been planning to replace DHs 2001 car. He would get my 2003 and I'd pay cash for a new to us 5-8 year old car. His car is running just fine so we are holding off on this until we see how the new guy affects our daily lives. We could go to one car if we had to, we just don't want to.

I'm hoping that they make changes to the HSA rules. I think HSAs are a wonderful idea and I don't think it should be restricted to HDHP plans. Some plans have such terribly high deductibles but don't qualify under current rules because they pay for some things before the deductible is met.

I just want to make it to Medicare. I've got 36 months left.

[Sue J]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider Somehow I think that would not be the case for us. We do not have an HSA nor want one. Currently our Insurance payment is about $1700 PM before subsidy, after subsidy it is $150pm. I cannot see a tax credit for $18600 pa when our income/MAGI is only $33,000 in retirement. That math does not work. How can one get a tax credit for a 10 x the taxes one pays to start with. these numbers are not exact but within 10% of actual.

Some tax credits are "refundable tax credits", which means that you can be credited above and beyond what you paid in. Example - Your income is $35,000 - $12,600 std ded - $8100 2 personal exemptions = $14,300 taxable income. 10% tax is $1430.

A regular tax credit of $3000 gets you to $0 in taxes. A refundable tax credit gets you to a $1570 refund, money paid to you above and beyond what your tax liability is. If you look at that extra money put in your pocket from another angle it looks an awful lot like a subsidy.

[jesaco]

I do not avail of the subsidy since our income is over the limit, so taking the subsidy portion out will not affect me. However, if they take out the pre existing provision, Then I will have a problem.
I believe most people in their 50's or like me in their 60's most probably had some health issues and will be considered having "Pre existing condition" .
If a replacement to the ACA still mandates that insurance companies cannot refuse coverage people with pre existing conditions but can charge much much higher premiums, Then it will definitely affect us.

[travelover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider Poll, Please only respond to the poll if you use the ACA for health insurance................

But....... but I get healthcare from my former employer and it is government subsidized. I pay no taxes on the value of the insurance and I'm pretty sure they deduct the costs of my insurance from their taxes.