New ACA Subsidy In Relief Package?

[GenXguy]

A little off topic (Sorry), but why wouldn't they just re-implement the mandate or make it $1 to eliminate the ACA lawsuit currently in the SCOTUS?

I recall reading that there is a plan, through executive order, to undo the changes that got rid of the mandate.

The mandate was never removed - it still exists in the law. They didn't get rid of the mandate, so it can't be re-implemented. The penalty for not complying with the mandate was lowered to $0, but the mandate itself is still in place. I mentioned the $0 mandate penalty earlier in this thread. If they had simply removed the mandate, we wouldn't be in limbo with the court right now, but that didn't happen. There's a big lawsuit that SCOTUS heard in early November regarding the constitutionality of the mandate since there is no penalty associated with it anymore. We are still waiting on a ruling from the Supreme Court, which we will get no later the June but possibly sooner.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20201111.916623/full/

 

[braumeister]

The penalty for not complying with the mandate was lowered to $0, but the mandate itself is still in place.

So in other words, if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there, it still makes a sound. Gotcha.

 

[jimbee]

Words matter. Especially when discussing matters of law.

 

[GenXguy]

So in other words, if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there, it still makes a sound. Gotcha.

Indeed, now we just need SCOTUS to make that ruling. Most people expect it, but there's no guarantee. So we wait....

 

[GenXguy]

Words matter. Especially when discussing matters of law.

Indeed. It makes all the difference in the world in this "case".

 

[ncbill]

Indeed, now we just need SCOTUS to make that ruling. Most people expect it, but there's no guarantee. So we wait....

Most legal commentators I've read expect that even if the mandate doesn't stand, the rest of the law will.

I just wish we could access the ACA rather than being forced to take overpriced employer-provided insurance.

 

[GenXguy]

Most legal commentators I've read expect that even if the mandate doesn't stand, the rest of the law will.

Yes, that's the ruling that I meant most people are expecting since oral arguments (back in Nov). First they have to decide if the plaintiffs even have standing.

I just wish we could access the ACA rather than being forced to take overpriced employer-provided insurance.

My employer provided health care is pretty well subsidized, although my deductible for care at the local hospital went from $100 to $250, and in-network (excluding local hospital) deductible went from $100 to $1500, plus they added coinsurance of 80% to 90% where we used to just have some co-pays. So, while it's not as good of a deal as it used to be, I'll still have to budget more for health care insurance and total out of pocket looking ahead to the ACA, and then Medicare beyond that. And that's assuming subsidies (PTC for ACA). I'm not even a big health care user - usually just yearly appointments and labs.

 

[Smitty700]

I don't think 6-figure earners should need help paying their premiums.

I would agree with this if reasonably priced insurance without subsidies were avaiable.

When I left work, the high deductible plan COBRA premiums for my wife and me were about $9500 per year. When I had no choice but to go to the ACA marketplace for insurance, the high deductible plans were $22,000 per year.

That's a significant difference for the mandatory "affordable" coverage through the marketplace, even for couple with a 6-figure income.

 

[jabbahop]

our lowest priced silver plan is $26K with a $14K deductible for Utah couple in early 60’s.

 

[Exchme]

Most legal commentators I've read expect that even if the mandate doesn't stand, the rest of the law will.

I just wish we could access the ACA rather than being forced to take overpriced employer-provided insurance.

What? There is no free lunch, medical insurance is very expensive. Employer plans generally have subsidies provided by the employer as a benefit. If your ACA price would be less than that, it is because the rest of us would be subsidizing you.

 

[augam]

I don't think 6-figure earners should need help paying their premiums. The help would be better used for those in the 200-400% poverty level who lose the cost sharing. Get those people the cost sharing so they don't have a $5000 deductible. That is a killer for the low to mid earners but not so much for the 6-figure people.

Really. I don't think so. Lets make everyone pay the same so some of us aren't paying 18/k in premiums.

 

[RetiredAt55.5]

I just wish we could access the ACA rather than being forced to take overpriced employer-provided insurance.

Depending on your situation, you might be get an ACA policy and save money. A lot of it depends on how heavily your employer subsidies their insurance.

Here's one article discussing this -

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-i-buy-health-insurance-the-exchange-rather-signing-employers-insurance.html

 

[zinger1457]

This is a copy of the ACA subsidy changes in the current House plan, expected to be voted on next week. Premium cost for silver plan capped at 8.5% of income for anyone over 400% of poverty limit (~$51K for a single), no more subsidy cliff. Will go into effect for 2021 tax year as currently written.
Click on thumbnail to get a better view.

 

[RunningBum]

no more subsidy cliff.

Hooray if this really happens. It actually only gives me about another $4000 to convert before I'd hit my QDivs starting to be taxed, but it would reduce the stress of making sure I don't go over the cliff. $100 taxed at 27% is a whole lot more palatable than $100 over the cliff costing me some $5000 in subsidies.

 

[Fielding]

Here's an article on this proposed change:

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/i...d-19-relief-proposal-on-marketplace-premiums/

Here's a screenshot of the relevant graph of the cliff being removed. Note that the graph is dynamic by age. I'm showing 60+ since my guess is that's the most relevant one for most forum users, but try the URL above to see other ages.

https://imgur.com/a/bGfNN6f

"As noted above, older adults with incomes above 400% of poverty would generally see some of the most significant savings from the House proposal. Uninsured people in the subsidy cliff tend to be older, on average, than those eligible for subsidies, because premiums are so high for this group under current law. Figure 2 below shows the amount of savings available to older enrollees currently falling in the subsidy cliff. Compared to current premium payments, a 60-year-old with a $55,000 income would pay 77% less for a bronze plan ($146 vs. $634 per month), 56% less for a benchmark silver plan ($390 vs. $887 per month), and 52% less for a gold plan ($453 vs. $951 per month), on average, under the House COVID-relief proposal. Many young adults with incomes above 400% of poverty who are currently in the subsidy cliff would also see savings under the House proposal, but those savings would be more modest (a 6-9% drop, depending on the metal level, for an average 27 year old)."

 

[Splash]

Here's an article on this proposed change:

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/i...d-19-relief-proposal-on-marketplace-premiums/

Thanks for sharing. Interesting and easy to understand article.

 

[RunningBum]

The subsidy changes are in the package that the House passed yesterday. See https://waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/files/documents/7.%20Tax.pdf and search for '9661', which is the section number for the ACA changes.

 

[truenorth418]

The subsidy changes are in the package that the House passed yesterday. See https://waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/files/documents/7. Tax.pdf and search for '9661', which is the section number for the ACA changes.

Thanks. I found it beginning on page 84 of the 90 pages at the link.

The changes apply to tax years 2021 and 2022.

 

[ncbill]

doesn't fix the family glitch, though.

 

[erkevin]

Anyone have any info or an inkling on how this would be implemented (if senate passes and Biden signs)? Would their be an immediate change in insurance premiums or would it continue as-is and "come out in the wash" at tax time?

 

[zinger1457]

Anyone have any info or an inkling on how this would be implemented (if senate passes and Biden signs)? Would their be an immediate change in insurance premiums or would it continue as-is and "come out in the wash" at tax time?

Haven't seen anything on that but based on the new rates it looks like my current premium cost after subsidy would decrease ~$90/mo.

 

[scrabbler1]

After getting back on the subsidy train in 2020, my premiums dropped about $350 per month. If this latest thing goes through, I'd see the premiums drop another $250 per month!

 

[GLM]

What about 2020?

I am reading that for 2020 there is a "temporary modification of limitations on reconciliation of tax credits " (section 9662) This seems to say any overpayment of the subsidy in 2020 won't be clawed back.

Getting ready to make Ira contributions to avoid the cliff with 2020 income. If passed does this mean I don't need to avoid the cliff for 2020 as well?

 

[RunningBum]

I am reading that for 2020 there is a "temporary modification of limitations on reconciliation of tax credits " (section 9662) This seems to say any overpayment of the subsidy in 2020 won't be clawed back.

Getting ready to make Ira contributions to avoid the cliff with 2020 income. If passed does this mean I don't need to avoid the cliff for 2020 as well?

That's how I read it, though if it were my money I'd be carefully reading what subparagraph (A) was that they are ignoring.

And since it says it's starting with years after 12/31/2019, it almost seems to say that if you underestimate your income and get a larger subsidy this year, they won't take it away if your income comes out bigger and your subsidy should be smaller. That doesn't seem right to me.

 

[BeachOrCity]

I was shocked they only did a 2 year fix on premiums for those over the cliff. Big mistake politically imo.