One additional interesting thing about the age 60 table - they posted the catastrophic plan premium alongside the metal plans.
Most of the data published so far has not included this information.
The news and blog coverage focuses on the catastrophic plans as they might be used by young people, but they can also be an option for ER's.
They will be an alternative (variation?) to Mulligan's "pay 10%+ and take a partial deduction" scenario.
Health Care Reform – CMS Issues Proposed Rule: Catastrophic Plans
For North Dakota, one region's average bronze premium is $709, or $8500 per year. Dividing by .08 yields $106,000.
So for a married couple, both age 60, the threshold phasing out eligibility for a catastrophic plan would be $200,000+ ?!?
Hmmm. More research needed, and maybe a new thread. Is my math right? What are the pros and cons of catastrophic policy vs. a metal policy for a high-asset, low-income ER type?