Health Insurance Exchange Subsidies Will Be Granted on the Honor System!––Is There Something Wrong With "ObamaCare's" Federal Data Hub?
Come October millions of people will be applying for tens of billions of dollars in federal health insurance premium subsidies on the honor system.
On the Friday after the Fourth of July––when the administration apparently hoped no one would be paying attention––the Obama administration dropped 606 pages of regulations. Buried inside was the news that that insurance exchanges can ignore any personal income information they get from the Federal Data Hub during 2014 if it conflicts with "attestations" made by individuals.
That came three days after the administration announced it was putting the employer mandate on hold––and therefore not requiring detailed information from employers regarding the health plans they offer to their workers. The administration said the delay was because of the burden the reporting put on employers. But, was the administration ready to handle the data?
Because there will be no employer reporting in 2014, the administration also said in the Friday regs that the new health insurance exchanges "may accept the applicants attestation regarding enrollment in eligible employer-sponsored plan...without verification." Given the incredibly complex "ObamaCare" 60%/9.5% employer benefit eligibility rule, that will be a challenge for most citizens.
But here's the biggest deal in the new "ObamaCare" regulation: The exchanges are to rely upon the applicant's statement regarding their income the vast majority of the time. Instead of requiring proof of their income, as had been expected when the Federal Data Hub couldn't verify someone's representation, the exchanges will only do a formal check on a "statistically valid sample" of applications."
On the Friday after the Fourth of July––when the administration apparently hoped no one would be paying attention––the Obama administration dropped 606 pages of regulations. Buried inside was the news that that insurance exchanges can ignore any personal income information they get from the Federal Data Hub during 2014 if it conflicts with "attestations" made by individuals.
That came three days after the administration announced it was putting the employer mandate on hold––and therefore not requiring detailed information from employers regarding the health plans they offer to their workers. The administration said the delay was because of the burden the reporting put on employers. But, was the administration ready to handle the data?
Because there will be no employer reporting in 2014, the administration also said in the Friday regs that the new health insurance exchanges "may accept the applicants attestation regarding enrollment in eligible employer-sponsored plan...without verification." Given the incredibly complex "ObamaCare" 60%/9.5% employer benefit eligibility rule, that will be a challenge for most citizens.
But here's the biggest deal in the new "ObamaCare" regulation: The exchanges are to rely upon the applicant's statement regarding their income the vast majority of the time. Instead of requiring proof of their income, as had been expected when the Federal Data Hub couldn't verify someone's representation, the exchanges will only do a formal check on a "statistically valid sample" of applications."
As Obamacare insurance exchanges near launch, labor braces for impact
By DON McINTOSH, Associate Editor
Organized labor — entirely left out of the legislation that became known as Obamacare — has spent years behind the scenes patiently pleading with the Obama Administration to be allowed to benefit from the law’s implementation. Now, four months before the law’s mandated state insurance exchanges launch, it appears that while some union members will benefit, many others may actually be harmed.
The state-by-state health insurance exchanges, which launch Oct. 1, 2013, are the linchpin of Obamacare’s plan to cover the uninsured. The exchanges will benefit a minority of low-wage union members who don’t currently have employer-provided health insurance. But they may harm many other union members who are covered through union-affiliated multi-employer health trusts — which are prevalent in construction and in low-wage industries like grocery and janitorial.
The harm would come chiefly because union members and their employers won’t have access to individual subsidies, or to small-employer tax credits, for insurance purchased on the exchanges. But their nonunion competitors will.
Our View: Obamacare delay a gift to critics of reform
1:00 AMThe longer we go without full implementation, the harder it is to gauge the program's benefits.
The Affordable Care Act, known as "Obamacare" to friend and foe alike, is the perfect target to organize against.
While some popular elements of the law went into effect right away, like letting adult children stay on their parents' insurance until age 26, they have been overshadowed when critics warn of the pitfalls ahead.
Those critics were handed a favor last week, with the announcement that the Obama administration was putting off for one year the requirement that businesses with more than 50 employees offer affordable insurance or pay a penalty as high as $3,000 a worker.
http://www.pressherald.com/opinion/obamacare-delay-a-gift-to-critics-of-reform_2013-07-08.html
How Baby Erik Got Health Insurance - Kaiser Health News
By Don Sapatkin, The Philadelphia Inquirer
Two days after Erik Friedman was born, his parents applied for coverage under Pennsylvania's universal Children's Health Insurance Program. Six months later, they got it.What happened in between were 86 phone calls, two lost applications, a calculation error that tripled their income (and raised their premium), incorrect advice that they should (and did) drop their baby's catastrophic health insurance to qualify, multiple promises of responses that never came, and collection agency letters for hospital bills, which, of course, hadn't been paid.
How often this happens is unclear. State officials say it's rare. Children's advocates note that many low-income families might not know where to turn for help and simply give up.
Erik's parents -- Tara Mendola, a Ph.D. student, and Ari Friedman, an M.D.-Ph.D. student -- had no intention of giving up, eventually involving Gov. Tom Corbett's office to secure coverage for their son.
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2013/July/08/Parents-Have-Problems-Enrolling-Pennsylvania-Childrens-health-insurance-program.aspx
Tax talk third rail: The health care exemption
| |
| If Washington puts aside its spring of scandals and gets back to its normal summer agenda — fighting about taxes and entitlements — the king of all tax breaks won’t be on the table. The tax break on employer-sponsored health plans is one of the government’s largest tax expenditures, costing the feds $200 billion to $300 billion a year, depending on who’s doing the estimating. But it’s also proved to be one of the hardest to undo — arguably even more so now that the Affordable Care Act is full steam ahead. For one thing, lawmakers are wary of any policy changes that could contribute to higher health care costs for businesses, which already fear the health law will hurt their bottom line. Or higher costs for workers, who are also worried about how much they already pay for health care. And Republicans, still licking their wounds from a failed war to repeal Obamacare, aren’t interested in venturing out on a health policy limb. Both parties know the abstract economic rationale for eliminating the gigantic tax. Liberals say it’s regressive. Conservatives say it hinders individual consumer choice in an insurance free market. Health wonks say it promotes wasteful patterns of health care consumption. But taking away a tax break on health insurance that millions of Americans are used to is something that neither party wants to touch with a 10-foot pole. http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=397FCF67-ACF3-497B-A28D-65F98E5AEFB6 |
No comments:
Post a Comment