The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Screwed

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

It is a way of giving that person additional income tax free,
It's not income, it is a benefit. If the employee opts out, do they get all the money (taxed or untaxed) the plan costs? I know all the plans I have been in, opt out just means that I get my earned money that I wouldn't put in to the plan. I do not get the companies part of the HC payment, only my own contribution.
Maybe other companies are different but I have not heard of that.
and that reduces the revenue that the government gets--this has to be made up somehow.
How 'bout the gov spends less rather than take more.

And on a similar subject, what about 401k plans? and Flex plans? Subject to taxes?

Big RR
Posts: 14639
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Big RR »

It's not income, it is a benefit. If the employee opts out, do they get all the money (taxed or untaxed) the plan costs?
The same is true of other taxable benefits, like company cars or high value life insurance policies. why should healthcare be any different?
And on a similar subject, what about 401k plans? and Flex plans? Subject to taxes?
Not sure what a flex plan is, but 401K contributions of the employer are definitely taxable; to promote saving for retirement, the tax is delayed until the money is collected.

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

flex plans are pretax money you put in to a savings type account that you can use for medical expenses such as co-pays, presription co-pays, some otc drugs, dental and dental copays. No match by the company but you put it in weekely duringthe year but you could use it (including money not put in yet) all the first week of the year. Catch is , use it or lose it.
Gov not getting it's fair share full cut of my salary with that perk either. :ok

Big RR
Posts: 14639
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Big RR »

I think the tax free basis was a deliberate decision on the part of the government to promote such savings for health care related expenses.

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

the tax is delayed until the money is collected.
But their (the govs) cut is less usually as ones adjusted gross income is lower when withdrawals are finally made.
Any time I can lower the amount the goverment grabs of my pay, I do it.
legally of course.

They have proven over and over they cannot live within their means no matter how much they take from us.
Yet we are expected to live within our means (or else :o ).

But back to HC benefits should or should not be taxable.
Seeing as how many consider health care a "right" (alongside life , liberty, pursuit of happiness et.al.), is it fair to tax something that is considered a "right"?
(I do not consider HC a "right")
Is it fair that something you are forced to purchase by the gov (or pay a penalty tax) is then taxed by that same gov?
Guaranteed revenue stream isn't it. :shrug
for the gov and the insurance plan companies
But wait, the companies are pulling out left and right so I guess it's not so much a revenue stream for them. Imagine if they were taxed?
They are already talking a 16% average premium increase this year in NY. Can you imagine how much more premiums would cost if they were taxed?
And of course the gov would want higher premiums as the more something costs, the more they get.

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

Big RR wrote:I think the tax free basis was a deliberate decision on the part of the government to promote such savings for health care related expenses.
And now they are squeezing what you can buy with that money. To the point where less and less is being put into flex thus a larger share of my income is taxable.

Big RR
Posts: 14639
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Big RR »

And now they are squeezing what you can buy with that money. To the point where less and less is being put into flex thus a larger share of my income is taxable.
Not necessarily, medical expenses are still deductible, as Guin pointed out.
Is it fair that something you are forced to purchase by the gov (or pay a penalty tax) is then taxed by that same gov
Of course, the government doesn't force you to purchase your employer's plan, and (unless you pay with pretax money) you would only be charged for what employer is paying into the plan on your behalf--you already paid taxes on your money(and can deduct it as a medical expense).

And many people who do not have access to employer group plans pay the entire amount with money on which they have already paid taxes (subject to the deduction of a medical expense). those plans would not be taxed because the persons buying them are not receiving any portion of the plan paid for by an employer.
And of course the gov would want higher premiums as the more something costs, the more they get.
the way many meployers are shifting more of their healthcare insurance costs to employees, I would think there's little chance of that.

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

Not necessarily, medical expenses are still deductible, as Guin pointed out.
I know of no one who has gotten to deduct medical expences.
They have to surpass something like 10% of your salary and the only deduction is for the portion over that 10%.

Of course, the government doesn't force you to purchase your employer's plan
But they force me to "a" plan.
and (unless you pay with pretax money) you would only be charged for what employer is paying into the plan on your behalf--you already paid taxes on your money(and can deduct it as a medical expense).
I'm confused. You are for taxing these benefits, but now you say they should be tax deductable?
those plans would not be taxed because the persons buying them are not receiving any portion of the plan paid for by an employer.
Unless they plan on getting a cadillac plan (or are those not available to buy on the "open" market?
the way many meployers are shifting more of their healthcare insurance costs to employees, I would think there's little chance of that.
unless of course it's a cadillac plan.

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Lord Jim »

Big RR wrote:I think the tax free basis was a deliberate decision on the part of the government to promote such savings for health care related expenses.
Yes, and for a similar reason, employer provided healthcare benefits are not taxed as income...

The government wants to provide incentive for people to sign up for the plans, and for businesses to provide them...

And this strikes me as a Good Thing...

It seems to me that if one's goal is to undermine the employer based healthcare system, taxing those benefits is an excellent way to do it...

It's also a really good way to get a whole bunch of people (especially younger, healthier, people) opting out of healthcare coverage entirely...

That cruel, cold-hearted bitch, The Law Of Unintended Consequences, would crank in big time...

One of the biggest thing undermining the stability of the Obamacare markets (that also is driving up premiums) is the lack of participation by healthier younger people...

Taxing employer provided healthcare benefits would undoubtedly extend this problem into that sector as well, as younger folks would choose to opt out rather than face a big tax increase for benefits they rarely use. (Currently, younger workers at companies that offer healthcare plans tend to sign up for them because the contributions and co-pays are pretty modest. Suddenly add an an additional 5-10 thousand a year in "income" that they don't receive but get taxed on and this will undoubtedly change.)

And then of course with fewer young people signed up the cost to employers for providing these packages will rise, encouraging fewer of them to provide them...

And other employees, (not just the young and healthy) who can't afford the big tax increase that comes with these benefits now being treated as income will be forced to drop the coverage as well...

The net result of this will be many fewer people with healthcare, and many more people doing exactly what the advocates of Obama care have claimed (with some justification) should be avoided...

People using the ER as their primary healthcare provider...

In fact, a good argument can be made that given all of these easily foreseeable negative consequences, taxing employer provided healthcare plans could actually result in a net revenue loss to the government, as the rising costs of providing care for legions of newly uninsured through the emergency system outstrips the revenue brought in through the tax...
ImageImageImage

Big RR
Posts: 14639
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Big RR »

OK, oldr, because I think you are earnestly raising questions and not just trying to have a little fun--as I see the issue, it is this:

1. Employers are paying part or all of the costs for the health insurance of employees. This is a benefit to employees which could be worth tens of thousands of dollars per year.

2. Whatever the employer is paying for that plan is a value to each employee, as most people would seek to get insurance coverage if it were not provided through their employer.

3. Employees do not pay tax on the value of this benefit under current law.

4. Other employer provided benefits (like company cars or excess value life insurance) are taxed at the value the employee receives (e.g. when I had a company car, I had to file quarterly reports showing what my mileage was for company business and personal business, and had to pay income tax on the value of the benefit for my personal business).

5. Many employers also provide enhanced insurance coverage (Cadillac Plans) to their senior management at a cost far in excess of the policies offered to the other employees. The senior managers do not pay tax on the value of this benefit.

6. This thread has talked about 2 things--all employees paying taxes on the value of their insurance, or at least senior managers paying such taxes on their plans (or possibly on the excess value of their plans as compared to those of the rank and file employees). I have vouched my support for both plans.

7. People who obtain coverage on their own can but whatever plan they want with no tax consequences precisely because they are not receiving any payment of the premiums by an employer. They are paying for what they are getting, there is no benefit from an employer (or anyone else) to consider.

8. If you do not want to pay any additional taxes for your health insurance, you can easily reject your employer's offered coverage and buy any plan you want on your own with no tax consequences.

9. You are correct about the 10% (of AGI) threshold for medical expense deductibility, but I have known many unfortunate people who have reached that threshold year after year. All it takes is a major illness.

10. I don't understand your "tax deductible" question.

I hope this helps.

Jim--you could be right, but I still think people should be made to realize that they are paying for their benefits now--they are not being given by the employers--and they have a significant cost in what would otherwise be paid as wages. I think a lot of people don't see it that way. As for refusing coverage, sure a few might reject their employer paying $20,000 or more annually for their benefits, but most would see the value of that benefit even if it is taxable (now if the offer was the benefit or $20,000 more in salary, that would be a different thing).

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 8931
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Sue U »

The problem is that the US healthcare "system" has evolved onto a Rube Goldberg contraption of employment-based healthcare, tax deductions, tax exemptions, payroll taxes, individual coverage, subsidized "exchanges," means-tested public assistance and senior citizen/disability entitlement. This really can't be fixed by piecemeal band-aid solutions.

There is plenty enough money sloshing around in the system to provide quality healthcare for everyone, like every other civilized nation on the planet does. It just needs to be allocated more efficiently, and the profit motive squeezed out of the financing. All it takes is political will. Given the way the GOP is going about it, and the reaction it is provoking, it may come sooner rather than later. And THAT would be a Good Thing.
GAH!

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Lord Jim »

they have a significant cost in what would otherwise be paid as wages
Big RR, a couple of questions:

First, what guarantee is there that if a company were to discontinue paying for healthcare benefits, that they would then turn around and take that money and give it to their employees as a wage increase?

I suspect most probably wouldn't; certainly not all of it...


Second, even if they did, what guarantee is their that the employee would then turn around and apply their new income to a healthcare plan? (Some, perhaps most, would but again the highest percentage of those who wouldn't would be the younger healthier people that you need to keep in the system in order to prevent premiums from skyrocketing even further)
ImageImageImage

Big RR
Posts: 14639
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Big RR »

Jim--I never said either would happen; I agree with you it is unlikely. However, when a salary is set for a position, the cost of the benefits is always taken into account, so as an economic principle if the employer were not providing benefits, the salaries would/could be higher.

And that's my main point; many times I hear people bitch about the cost of Obamacare and saying they get insurance for a lot less, without even considering what their employer pays (hell, for a long time people didn't even pay a portion and were unaware of the costs of such benefits).

We are stuck with the employer paid plans, like it or not, but people should be aware of the value of what they are getting. Oldr, who I think is a pretty smart guy, draws a distinction between income and a benefit, and I think many others do as well. But regardless of who is footing the bill, the benefits are a part of an employee's compensation package and people should recognize it. This is part of what you are paid for your work, not a gift or something the employer gets for free. These benefits cost (and are worth) a lot of money. And it should be taken into account when people discuss what they "pay" for healthcare insurance.

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6721
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Long Run »

Big RR wrote: These benefits cost (and are worth) a lot of money. And it should be taken into account when people discuss what they "pay" for healthcare insurance.
Next thing you know, Big RR will be saying stuff like TANSTAAFL and quoting old articles from The Freeman. :)

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

I think you are earnestly raising questions and not just trying to have a little fun--
Thank you, I am not trying to have a little fun, I am earnestly raising questions. but there is fun but not in the satire sense.
:ok
1. Employers are paying part or all of the costs for the health insurance of employees. This is a benefit to employees which could be worth tens of thousands of dollars per year.
Agreed, but as LJ pointed out, if no plan were offered, would the plan worth be offered in salary increase? Doubtful. Maybe a bit, but not the full value. As salaries rise, so does the employee and employer tax burden.
2. Whatever the employer is paying for that plan is a value to each employee, as most people would seek to get insurance coverage if it were not provided through their employer.

They may seek but not be able to afford I fear.
3. Employees do not pay tax on the value of this benefit under current law.
Agreed. And IMHO I don't think they should. LJ pointed out reasons I agree with. No need to retype or cut and paste here. ;)
4. Other employer provided benefits (like company cars or excess value life insurance) are taxed at the value the employee receives (e.g. when I had a company car, I had to file quarterly reports showing what my mileage was for company business and personal business, and had to pay income tax on the value of the benefit for my personal business).
Different types of benefits. HC benefits I think are in thier own ""category" for lack of a better term
5. Many employers also provide enhanced insurance coverage (Cadillac Plans) to their senior management at a cost far in excess of the policies offered to the other employees. The senior managers do not pay tax on the value of this benefit.
If one rises to the point of senior management and the benefits are better, more power to them. I do not begrudge them and their benies nor salaries nor any other perks. In the company I am employed by, have better perks that are better than some but not as good as others. I do know that since obamacare has been around, we do have more "part timers" doing production work than before. We also use more "temps" than before.
6. This thread has talked about 2 things--all employees paying taxes on the value of their insurance, or at least senior managers paying such taxes on their plans (or possibly on the excess value of their plans as compared to those of the rank and file employees). I have vouched my support for both plans.
I disagree. Either tax all plans or no plans. If you only tax "a" particular type of plan, what if a company only offers that type of plan to all employees? Will they then downgrade the plan so it's within the tax deduction area?
7. People who obtain coverage on their own can but whatever plan they want with no tax consequences precisely because they are not receiving any payment of the premiums by an employer. They are paying for what they are getting, there is no benefit from an employer (or anyone else) to consider.
Agreed.
8. If you do not want to pay any additional taxes for your health insurance, you can easily reject your employer's offered coverage and buy any plan you want on your own with no tax consequences.
Yes, but now I pay full price with no help/benefit from employer. This goes back to will my salary increase the by the amount the employer pays to the medical plan? Pushing 60 (59 in a week) I would "take the bite" and get insurance pretty much regardless of whether I a pay raise or not. But iff I were young again I might not. Especailly if I were not married and childless.
9. You are correct about the 10% (of AGI) threshold for medical expense deductibility, but I have known many unfortunate people who have reached that threshold year after year. All it takes is a major illness.
Yes there are, but more are not in that category and do not pay out that much in medical expenses.
10. I don't understand your "tax deductible" question.
I don't remember the point I was trying to make/ask about. I'll have to review.
But regardless of who is footing the bill, the benefits are a part of an employee's compensation package and people should recognize it. This is part of what you are paid for your work, not a gift or something the employer gets for free.
I do recognise that benefits are part of a compensation package, just as vacation days and holidays are too.
But I do believe there is a difference between a HC benefit and a company car.

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9607
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Econoline »

  • Panicking Mitch McConnell Shoves Entire Senate Healthcare Bill Into Mouth As Democrat Walks Past

    WASHINGTON—Quickly crumpling up all 500 pages of the legislation upon hearing footsteps in the hallway, sources reported Tuesday that a panicked Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell shoved the entire Senate healthcare bill in his mouth as a Democratic senator walked past. According to witnesses, McConnell became visibly flustered upon realizing there was no place to hide from the Democratic colleague approaching his doorway and began ripping wads of documents from a binder and cramming them through his open jaws as rapidly as possible. Asked about the location of an upcoming meeting, McConnell, cheeks distended to many times their original size, reportedly grunted several times and gestured toward a nearby conference room. At press time, McConnell had spit out the massive clump of saliva-coated, half-chewed papers, which, while largely illegible, would reportedly insure 10 million more people than the original.
    Image
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 19495
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by BoSoxGal »

Capitol Police drag disabled protesters out of wheelchairs during Trumpcare protests
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 03456.html

Keep up the pressure, comrades!

The highlights I've read about from the Senate bill are gruesome indeed; people like me are simply deadwood (soon, anyway) in the eyes of the majority of the GOP.

Medicaid for all!!
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9607
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Econoline »

:arg :evil:
  • GOP Healthcare Bill takeaway #1

    In the most conservative states, including all of The Old South, Nevada, Arizona, and Texas, 50% to 70% of births are funded at least in part by Medicaid.

    The Senate version of the GOP Healthcare bill makes PREGNANT WOMEN ineligible for Medicaid. Specially for Medicaid expansion.

    The bill mentions pregnancy 11 times. 4 times in the context of denying funding for abortion, 4 times under work requirements, and 2 times under what will be covered by insurance if you can afford insurance. And once in the section making pregnancy a condition for denying Medicaid.

    In the most conservative Red States, Medicaid funds at least part of up to 72% of all births.

    The GOP healthcare bill would remove funding for those births.

    The bill ALSO defunds Planned Parenthood.

    The bill ALSO removes a requirement for health insurance to cover birth control (it doesn't say insurance can't cover birth control, but unlike the ACA it wouldn't be required to do so).

    The bill ALSO removes the requirement for essential health benefits, meaning insurance no longer has to cover maternity care and emergency services related to pregnancy.

    So, no coverage for birth control, no coverage for pre-natal care, no coverage for birth, no coverage for the child after birth.

    For up to 70% of births.

    And removes the requirement for healthcare insurance to cover the remaining 30%.

    In the reddest of Red States run by Pro-Life conservatives.

(credit Jim Wright on Facebook)
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 19495
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by BoSoxGal »

Incontrovertible evidence that pro-life = anti-abortion. Period.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Guinevere
Posts: 8990
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: The GOP Health Plan -or-If You're Not Wealthy You're Scr

Post by Guinevere »

Fuckers.

I can't believe we're back to this again. AGAIN. A world where women cannot have sex, cannot enjoy sex, and even though they want to use us as breeders, they have zero regard for us, even while pregnant, because there is always another fertile young thing down the street if the last one doesn't have a good outcome.

I hate this so much. I don't know if I want to scream or cry more.
“I ask no favor for my sex. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.” ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paraphrasing Sarah Moore Grimké

Post Reply