Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Moe
ACA 101
I'm certainly not an expert on the topic, but the biggest issue I see with the ACA is that no one knows what it really entails. People are getting their information from third parties and not researching it themselves. Yes, this also includes the legislators that had the responsibility of making it law.
On a personal note, my company rep on the health insurance commission had no idea that the 80% rule even existed, so I've got that going for me. We weren't given a refund because our insurance company is a self funded co-op and spends much more than 80% on services. I know a few people that have, though.
|
What I'm curious to see is how many companies will decide to stop providing health insurance coverage for their employees at all. It really seems like a no win for the employers to provide a health insurance. As your link mentioned:
"here are two situations where large employers may face a penalty for workers who get subsidized coverage in an Exchange:
1. Large employers that do not offer coverage and have at least one full-time employee receiving subsidized coverage are assessed an annual fee of $2,000 per full-time employee, but the first 30 employees are excluded in calculating the assessment.
2. Large employers who offer coverage that is either unaffordable or inadequate and who have at least one full-time employee receiving subsidized coverage in the Exchange must pay an annual fee of $3,000 for each full-time employee receiving a premium credit, with a maximum penalty equal to $2,000 for each full-time employee, excluding the first 30 employees from the assessment. (Coverage is considered unaffordable if the employee must contribute more than 9.5 percent of their household income for their premium. Coverage is considered inadequate if the plan's does not coverage at least 60 percent of a person's medical costs on average - referred to as actuarial values.)"
So basically employers could cancel all insurance and after excluding 30 employees pay a $2,000 fine if at least one employee qualifies for the subsidy.
Or the employer could gamble and provide insurance and risk that their employees won't choose to go to the exchange and see if they qualify for a subsidy. If they choose to offer insurance they could be faced with a fine of up to $2,000 per employee (no 30 employee exclusion being available as if no insurance were offered). So really in the second scenario the employer ends up picking up medical insurance costs and larger potential penalties.