Obama care penalties

[code1211]

Penalties

Beginning in 2014, the federal government will impose new fines on citizens and legal residents who do not obtain government-approved insurance. Those without insurance will pay a tax that is the greater of a flat fee, or a percentage of family income. The flat fee will be phased in over several years.

In 2014, the penalty will be $95 per adult in an uninsured household,

increasing to $325 in 2015,

then to $695 in 2016,

after which it will increase annually in line with consumer inflation. For uninsured children, the fine will be half the amount applied to uninsured adults.

If greater, households pay 1 percent of their income in 2014, 2 percent in 2015, and 2.5 percent in 2016 and thereafter in lieu of the flat per person fee.

Regressive Incidence

The individual mandate falls more heavily on low and moderate income families. They will be required to enroll in health insurance plans that generally are more expensive than many of today’s offerings, and if they don’t do so pay a fine or a tax that they do not pay today. These added costs will mean these households have less discretion to spend their limited resources on other priorities, such as perhaps education or housing.

The Individual Mandate | ObamaCare Watch

 

[Fisher]

A lot of people who think they are going to be getting free Anthem are going to be royally pissed when they end up on medicaid that fewer doctors take.

I was talking to a CPA today about some things and the subject of Obamacare came up. He said that all of his doctor clients are so turned around already that they don't really know what to do or expect come next year. He said a few of the close to retirement age ones are trying to find someone to buy them out on the buildings and equipment this year when cap gains are more favorable so they can walk away next year or the year after if becomes the fiasco they expect it to be.

 

[opendebate]

Penalties

Beginning in 2014, the federal government will impose new fines on citizens and legal residents who do not obtain government-approved insurance. Those without insurance will pay a tax that is the greater of a flat fee, or a percentage of family income. The flat fee will be phased in over several years.

In 2014, the penalty will be $95 per adult in an uninsured household,

increasing to $325 in 2015,

then to $695 in 2016,

after which it will increase annually in line with consumer inflation. For uninsured children, the fine will be half the amount applied to uninsured adults.

If greater, households pay 1 percent of their income in 2014, 2 percent in 2015, and 2.5 percent in 2016 and thereafter in lieu of the flat per person fee.

Regressive Incidence

The individual mandate falls more heavily on low and moderate income families. They will be required to enroll in health insurance plans that generally are more expensive than many of today’s offerings, and if they don’t do so pay a fine or a tax that they do not pay today. These added costs will mean these households have less discretion to spend their limited resources on other priorities, such as perhaps education or housing.

The Individual Mandate | ObamaCare Watch

There is also assistance available to help cover the cost of premiums, based on income and the income requirements for medicare are much lower.

 

[code1211]

There is also assistance available to help cover the cost of premiums, based on income and the income requirements for medicare are much lower.

What are they? This is not that easy to find actual facts on.

A reasonable person might think that they are not trying to make this public, transparent and understandable.

 

[Helix]

it was a dumb plan when the heritage foundation proposed it, and it's still a dumb plan. i vastly prefer single payer.

 

[specklebang]

it was a dumb plan when the heritage foundation proposed it, and it's still a dumb plan. i vastly prefer single payer.

I think you will ultimately get your wish.

 

[opendebate]

What are they? This is not that easy to find actual facts on.

A reasonable person might think that they are not trying to make this public, transparent and understandable.

Quiet honestly I think opponents are putting out a lot of false information and using scare tactics (ie: death panels) but it is complicated.

There is a lot of information here:
Subsidy Calculator | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
Health Care that Works for Americans | The White House
https://www.healthcare.gov/families/

 

[Stewart]

I think you will ultimately get your wish.

I don't think so. Its not really a viable option considering the budgetary situation and the history of healthcare.

I think something along the Taiwanese or Swiss reforms is likely. There are more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[specklebang]

I don't think so. Its not really a viable option considering the budgetary situation and the history of healthcare.

I think something along the Taiwanese or Swiss reforms is likely. There are more than one way to skin a cat.

Skin a cat? Skin a cat? Jeez, you sure know how to hurt a guy.

It seems like to logical next step. I'm not familiar with the Taiwanese or Swiss systems.

 

[code1211]

Quiet honestly I think opponents are putting out a lot of false information and using scare tactics (ie: death panels) but it is complicated.

There is a lot of information here:
Subsidy Calculator | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
Health Care that Works for Americans | The White House
https://www.healthcare.gov/families/

Thank you.

I've saved these sites and they should come in handy. I have a daughter who is thinking about insurance and may need to take advantage of this.

You have be very helpful.

 

[Stewart]

Skin a cat? Skin a cat? Jeez, you sure know how to hurt a guy.

It seems like to logical next step. I'm not familiar with the Taiwanese or Swiss systems.

It must be a British idiom.

There are more than one way to archive universal healthcare. That's really what we all want. A high performance healthcare system with universal healthcare as its keystone. In fact only Britain relies on government owned 'single payer' system. Canada uses Medicare/national health insurance(Medicare for All) France and Germany use employee sponsored health insurance.
Switzerland and Taiwan are interesting to us as they have only recently become industrialized nations with UHC. Taiwan system was designed by an Chinois-American, William Hsiao a God among mere mortals of health economists. Taiwan developed a NHI but one supported primarily by employer contributions, government subsidies supporting the poor and unemployed. Switzerland selected an insurance based solution which every citizen must pay for up to 8% of their income (sound familiar?)
Whichever way we chose, I think the most important key is to completely return tom the foundations rather than attempting to build upon the unstable mess that we have assemble with little forward planning.

Yes this means I would dissamble Medicare even if it were to replace it with a NHI system.

 

[specklebang]

It must be a British idiom.

There are more than one way to archive universal healthcare. That's really what we all want. A high performance healthcare system with universal healthcare as its keystone. In fact only Britain relies on government owned 'single payer' system. Canada uses Medicare/national health insurance(Medicare for All) France and Germany use employee sponsored health insurance.
Switzerland and Taiwan are interesting to us as they have only recently become industrialized nations with UHC. Taiwan system was designed by an Chinois-American, William Hsiao a God among mere mortals of health economists. Taiwan developed a NHI but one supported primarily by employer contributions, government subsidies supporting the poor and unemployed. Switzerland selected an insurance based solution which every citizen must pay for up to 8% of their income (sound familiar?)
Whichever way we chose, I think the most important key is to completely return tom the foundations rather than attempting to build upon the unstable mess that we have assemble with little forward planning.

Yes this means I would dissamble Medicare even if it were to replace it with a NHI system.

Skin a cat is also an American expression and I was just being humorous.

Actually, Medicare runs fairly well and the solution looks like just extending Medicare to all. The problem is that we have so many people that take a free ride. Even if they somehow get everyone to pay in, as many do now by way of employment or private insurance, we have a large underclass of loafers and illegals who tend to use more than their share of services.

So, unless we start turning away those who don't contribute, we just can't take in enough to provide decent care. This means that those who pay, and pat a lot, will get awful care while the useless, who can easily sitrt around foir hours on end since they don't work, will get better care than the ones who paid. Expect resistance to that and yet don't expect anyone to be disallowed from mooching.

So its either more of the same or single payer which means we just offer clinic services with NPs seeing everyone and MDs administrating.

 

[274ina]

yes and the insurance will be FREE or 2 or 4% of your pay.

So why not get the AFFORDABLE HC.????????