Between FIRE and 65 paid healthcare options.

[COcheesehead]

What you could do is save like crazy into 401k/HSA/Roth, etc. Use CHM Gold plan at $162 per month to "share" most health expenses with your savings as a backup. Now you've self-insured the bits and pieces that the ministry plan won't share without paying out the a**. Ministry plans have no networks so no surprise bills.

Also, for any expense that is not share-able, CHM has the Prayer Page where members voluntarily chip in to pay your remaining bills. Every month, the 400,000 members collectively contribute millions of dollars to pay the remaining bills of other members. The amount wobbles over time but typically a contribution of $11 per month pays off any expenses that aren't shareable under the main CHM plans.

So basically a religious based Go Fund Me with your retirement savings as your backup. This is what you want for your healthcare? House of cards. You buy insurance for what you can’t or do not want to pay for. You don’t put the rest of your financial future on the line because of a medical issue.

 

[Shardo]

Retired ~6 yrs ago at 57, have UHC insurance thru previous employer at $827/month with a $2000 deductible.

My sweetie is still working and carries her own insurance thru her employer.

My insurance ain't cheap but it's still cheaper than getting it thru the ACA.

Medicare next May!!

 

[gtweath]

I did my research and decided to try a health share ministry plan. So far, I couldn't be happier with the plan and have saved over $18K/yr in premiums alone! Additionally, I can go to any doctor/health facility I choose without needing a referral! I have had 2 "claims" so far (knee injections for an old ACL injury and a broken foot) that totaled approximately $12K - $15K in costs and I paid essentially zero out of pocket after reimbursements. I am fortunate that I have significant resources to cover out of pockets which weighs into my risk/reward analysis, but I also can look back and say I am over $18K ahead after 1 year on the plan.

I am looking at them now...would you mind sharing (no pun intended ) which one you went with?

 

[zinger1457]

I hit a wall almost 2 years ago when my ACA plan as it not only became ridiculously expensive (no subsidy due to income level), but had none of our desired doctors. I did my research and decided to try a health share ministry plan. So far, I couldn't be happier with the plan and have saved over $18K/yr in premiums alone!

I've been on ACA since day one but have researched the ministries a little. I hadn't heard many (if any) negative comments until recently. It seems that Liberty HealthShare may be in a bit of a financial pinch from what I've read, last year they increased premiums by 50%, doubled the deductible, and many more complaints about very slow or no reimbursements.

 

[Marc]

Wish we could use the ACA for coverage.

Based on our location, income, and family size we could pay as little as $100/month, $2600 max out of pocket for a silver-level plan (using the KFF calculator)

But we get health insurance through spouse's plan...~$900/month employee share, $13,500 max out of pocket...for a HDHP.

Are you saying you would rather have taxpayers cover your insurance cost versus your wife's employer?

There sure are a lot of rich people on this site who see nothing wrong with the rest of us supporting your medical costs (beyond Medicare which we all have been paying into for decades).

Marc

 

[Audie Murphy]

Are you saying you would rather have taxpayers cover your insurance cost versus your wife's employer?

There sure are a lot of rich people on this site who see nothing wrong with the rest of us supporting your medical costs (beyond Medicare which we all have been paying into for decades).

Marc

It really is not a rich or poor thing. It is more about taking advantage of the laws as they are set up. A person with a large nest egg is not necessarily “rich” if you ask me. They are people who have saved money over their working years so they control their own destiny later in life. ACA does not means test people. I guess some might think they should and either deny or confiscate to make them less (as you see it) “rich.” The true difference is the rich in your eyes didn’t squander every single dollar that came through their hands. Jealousy is one thing but be careful where envy is involved.

 

[Dtail]

Are you saying you would rather have taxpayers cover your insurance cost versus your wife's employer?

There sure are a lot of rich people on this site who see nothing wrong with the rest of us supporting your medical costs (beyond Medicare which we all have been paying into for decades).

Marc

Will ask this question. If you could use the ACA plan and pay $100 monthly with a 2k max OOP, you wouldn't take advantage of it, irrespective of how rich or poor you are?

 

[Marc]

It really is not a rich or poor thing. It is more about taking advantage of the laws as they are set up. A person with a large nest egg is not necessarily “rich” if you ask me. They are people who have saved money over their working years so they control their own destiny later in life. ACA does not means test people. I guess some might think they should and either deny or confiscate to make them less (as you see it) “rich.” The true difference is the rich in your eyes didn’t squander every single dollar that came through their hands. Jealousy is one thing but be careful where envy is involved.

Actually, I am neither jealous or envious; I have pretty good employer paid retiree health. Just that HHS is spending a fortune on ACA (not just subsidies but also expanded Medicaid) and no one seems to be putting two and two together rightly blaming ACA for our current deficit issues.

Marc

 

[Marc]

Will ask this question. If you could use the ACA plan and pay $100 monthly with a 2k max OOP, you wouldn't take advantage of it, irrespective of how rich or poor you are?

That is a tough question that I will never have to face/answer. I don't know what I would do. I don't know if my self respect would let me become a "ward of the state."

Marc

 

[Dtail]

Actually, I am neither jealous or envious; I have pretty good employer paid retiree health. Just that HHS is spending a fortune on ACA (not just subsidies but also expanded Medicaid) and no one seems to be putting two and two together rightly blaming ACA for our current deficit issues.

Marc

Spending for subsidies for the ACA is causing our trillions of deficits? I don't think so.
For starters, look at the recent tax subsidy passed for the wealthy.

 

[Dtail]

That is a tough question that I will never have to face/answer. I don't know what I would do. I don't know if my self respect would let me become a "ward of the state."

Marc

Okay fair enough with your retiree medical.
Have never heard of one poster on this site who passed up on ACA subsidies and paid full freight just on principle.

 

[Audie Murphy]

Actually, I am neither jealous or envious; I have pretty good employer paid retiree health. Just that HHS is spending a fortune on ACA (not just subsidies but also expanded Medicaid) and no one seems to be putting two and two together rightly blaming ACA for our current deficit issues.

Marc

Sorry it was a misunderstanding on my part.

 

[joeea]

no one seems to be putting two and two together rightly blaming ACA for our current deficit issues.

You think the ACA is to blame for our current deficit issues?

 

[Marc]

Spending for subsidies for the ACA is causing our trillions of deficits? I don't think so.
For starters, look at the recent tax subsidy passed for the wealthy.

"Mandatory" outlays for HHS excluding Medicare are over $500,000,000,000 per year; yes, ACA, expanded medicaid, and other care provided does add up.

Marc

 

[OldConch]

Are you saying you would rather have taxpayers cover your insurance cost versus your wife's employer?

There sure are a lot of rich people on this site who see nothing wrong with the rest of us supporting your medical costs (beyond Medicare which we all have been paying into for decades).

Marc

A couple of interesting articles on U.S. taxpayer subsidies for health insurance:

"It will cost the U.S. government almost $700 billion in subsidies this year (to) help provide Americans under age 65 with health insurance through their jobs or in government-sponsored health programs, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The subsidies come from four main categories. About $296 billion is federal spending on programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which help insure low-income people. Almost as big are the tax write-offs that employers take for providing coverage to their workers. Medicare-eligible people, such as the disabled, account for $82 billion. Subsidies for Obamacare and for other individual coverage are the smallest segment, at $55 billion."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...lion-a-year-to-subsidize-u-s-health-insurance

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordeba...e-exemption-for-employer-provided-health-care

 

[stlguy57]

I ER'd at 58 and my spouse retired at 56. We live in FL and use Florida Blue Bronze Plan as our healthcare provider. We manage to keep our MAGI under the 62K threshold for a married couple. We have no debt or mortgage. As a result, we qualify for the monthly subsidy of $1744.00 that covers the entire monthly premium. This is our second year that we've not had a monthly premium cost for our healthcare because of the managed MAGI. Fingers crossed in the coming years but I doubt it.

 

[Dtail]

A couple of interesting articles on U.S. taxpayer subsidies for health insurance:

"It will cost the U.S. government almost $700 billion in subsidies this year (to) help provide Americans under age 65 with health insurance through their jobs or in government-sponsored health programs, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The subsidies come from four main categories. About $296 billion is federal spending on programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which help insure low-income people. Almost as big are the tax write-offs that employers take for providing coverage to their workers. Medicare-eligible people, such as the disabled, account for $82 billion. Subsidies for Obamacare and for other individual coverage are the smallest segment, at $55 billion."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...lion-a-year-to-subsidize-u-s-health-insurance

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordeba...e-exemption-for-employer-provided-health-care

Yeah remember this article being posted in another thread. So an employer provided medical coverage including to a retiree is being subsidized more than the ACA subsidies.
Hmmm........

 

[ziggy29]

Yeah remember this article being posted in another thread. So an employer provided medical coverage including to a retiree is being subsidized more than the ACA subsidies.
Hmmm........

It's human nature, also, that we tend to notice subsidies that *cost* us much more than we remember the ones that we benefit from. As a result it feels like almost everyone thinks others are getting fat at their expense, even if we are getting pretty close to a fair deal when everything is added up.

 

[scrabbler1]

A couple of interesting articles on U.S. taxpayer subsidies for health insurance:

"It will cost the U.S. government almost $700 billion in subsidies this year (to) help provide Americans under age 65 with health insurance through their jobs or in government-sponsored health programs, according to a report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The subsidies come from four main categories. About $296 billion is federal spending on programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which help insure low-income people. Almost as big are the tax write-offs that employers take for providing coverage to their workers. Medicare-eligible people, such as the disabled, account for $82 billion. Subsidies for Obamacare and for other individual coverage are the smallest segment, at $55 billion."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...lion-a-year-to-subsidize-u-s-health-insurance

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordeba...e-exemption-for-employer-provided-health-care

Besides what your posted from the article, remember that the employer subsidy for HI rises with income because it benefits those employees in higher tax brackets than in lower ones (i.e. untaxed income), while the ACA subsidies fall as income rises, with the subsidy falling suddenly to zero (i.e. subsidy "cliff"), a fairer but still imperfect way to distribute a subsidy IMHO.

 

[GenXguy]

It really is not a rich or poor thing. It is more about taking advantage of the laws as they are set up. A person with a large nest egg is not necessarily “rich” if you ask me. They are people who have saved money over their working years so they control their own destiny later in life. ACA does not means test people. I guess some might think they should and either deny or confiscate to make them less (as you see it) “rich.” The true difference is the rich in your eyes didn’t squander every single dollar that came through their hands. Jealousy is one thing but be careful where envy is involved.

This is true. I don't think people should be punished for having saved money. Taking away incentives for people to save sounds like a bad idea when so few people save as much as they should. They're already being taxed on any income related to their investments.

 

[RunningBum]

And taxed on the money we've put away in taxable or Roth accounts. Still to be taxed on tIRAs.

 

[triangle]

What you could do is save like crazy into 401k/HSA/Roth, etc. Use CHM Gold plan at $162 per month to "share" most health expenses with your savings as a backup. Now you've self-insured the bits and pieces that the ministry plan won't share without paying out the a**. Ministry plans have no networks so no surprise bills.

Also, for any expense that is not share-able, CHM has the Prayer Page where members voluntarily chip in to pay your remaining bills. Every month, the 400,000 members collectively contribute millions of dollars to pay the remaining bills of other members. The amount wobbles over time but typically a contribution of $11 per month pays off any expenses that aren't shareable under the main CHM plans.

Thanks. I have been meaning to look more seriously into the CHM and other non-ACA compliant plans as a better options for my situation.

I may be in an unusual situation but I do not think it is unique. Where I estimate to be outside the US for about 3 months per year, and then when in the USA frequently outside my home coverage area of offered ACA plans. Some of the travel is for fun, but most of it is to be with distant family members. Most insurance plans are tied to place and the yearly calendar versus something more sensible (IMO) like a rolling N months of medical expenses which count towards meeting some deductible. I would like to purchase a very high deductible plan but too many lawmakers said that would not be real insurance. I would contend it would be better than no insurance.

One can get a yearly physical and pay out of pocket. I have went to my local LabCorp to get an online blood test similar to what the doctor would order. I think of it like checking the air in your car tires. Not everything but a good start. Factor in family history and you have some insights into what may happen to you and what steps to take for your health.

 

[johnhkc]

So basically a religious based Go Fund Me with your retirement savings as your backup. This is what you want for your healthcare? House of cards. You buy insurance for what you can’t or do not want to pay for. You don’t put the rest of your financial future on the line because of a medical issue.

The Prayer Page exists only for those people whose expenses were not shareable under the guidelines of the plan level they chose. Pre-ex exclusions, primarily. CHM Gold shares pre-existing conditions on a phased-in basis. Silver and Bronze level do not. For any member whose expenses don't qualify for sharing, their expenses are listed on (as you say) "a religious based Go Fund Me".

The Prayer Page is a backup for anyone who would otherwise "fall through the cracks". Does any conventional plan have such a backup?

Their "house of cards" has been in operation for 36 years and has shared multiple billions of $ in expenses. They're audited every year.

 

[johnhkc]

Thanks. I have been meaning to look more seriously into the CHM and other non-ACA compliant plans as a better options for my situation.

I may be in an unusual situation but I do not think it is unique. Where I estimate to be outside the US for about 3 months per year, and then when in the USA frequently outside my home coverage area of offered ACA plans.

I asked CHM about this. I have some property in Cayman and asked if CHM would still share expenses outside the US. They said they share no matter where I am.

The biggest "hole" in CHM and other ministry plans is that they don't share ongoing medical expenses. Sharing is limited to "incidents". So ongoing treatments for problems like epilepsy or diabetes are not shared past the initial diagnosis. Drug costs are shared for the initial incident plus 6 months. (or was it 3 months? I don't remember.) The other ministries may be different.

Unlimited benefits cost unlimited premiums. It's always a trade-off.

 

[johnhkc]

I would like to purchase a very high deductible plan but too many lawmakers said that would not be real insurance. I would contend it would be better than no insurance.

To me, this is the key problem with Obamacare. It shuts down competitive freedom to create a plan crafted to your individual situation. It is now illegal to NOT shift risk to an insurance company. Insurance is a risk transfer product. The less risk you transfer, the lower the cost. Savers can use their savings to transfer far less risk than non-savers. A $25K deductible would not be a problem for me since the interest/divs/cap gains on my assets would cover that thus lowering my premiums. That's the main benefit of saving but we're denied the benefits of our own discipline and self-control.

I was waiting for Trump's solo AHP plans to go online this April. The courts ruled that Trump's rules creating them were an illegal run around ERISA (which is basically true). I wanted to self-insure to $125K in a solo AHP using a CHM Silver plan to pay the first $125K per year with a stop loss over the limit. Total premiums would drop to less than $100 per month without any geographic restrictions, skinny networks, etc.

There are many ways to structure a deal other than "pay us out the wazoo for everything" plans like we have now.