chimpyco's greatest new idea ...

[Aske]

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/16513010.htm

[Aske]

those with insurance already pay for those without, so lets tax them on top of it.




profit!  (for the insurance, and the bushcos)

[TFT]

I thought you wanted this kind of social thing?

Aren't the upper end costs of health care likely to come down because people don't want to pay the tax on the huge dollar plans so the insurers don't get to rape and pillage as much?

Won't fewer people opt for the mega packages and so the insurer will make less 'profit'?

'Under the president's plan, the administration would cap the amount of health benefits that can remain tax-free at $15,000 for a family and $7,500 for an individual. Anyone whose health insurance cost more than that would pay taxes on the difference. For example, a family with coverage costing $16,000 a year would pay taxes on $1,000. The cap would also be used to establish the amount of the new deduction for people who lack coverage. In this example, a family buying insurance on its own could take a $15,000 deduction -- even if the insurance cost less.'

Is 15k a year on health costs an oppressive lower limit?

Would it be possible to negotiate more pay and drop employer provided health care?

Wouldn't this be a good plan for you?

If you spend 5k, 10k,12k (or whatever amount below the threshold) a year on it, you can deduct 15k and pocket the tax break.

Someone with no insurance can get some coverage and have the cost of it met or mitigated.

Wouldn't it be more painful to BushCo$ and more helpful to small business and individuals?

You can't see any possibilty of win/win/win?

As you know, this stuff is foreign to me (literally), help me understand.

[Clive]

Under the president's plan, the administration would cap the amount of health benefits that can remain tax-free at $15,000 for a family and $7,500 for an individual. Anyone whose health insurance cost more than that would pay taxes on the difference. For example, a family with coverage costing $16,000 a year would pay taxes on $1,000. The cap would also be used to establish the amount of the new deduction for people who lack coverage. In this example, a family buying insurance on its own could take a $15,000 deduction -- even if the insurance cost less.

TFT, my old job paid the first $1200 monthly on our permiums, and we picked up the difference.  That's ~$14k annually (for triple chrome-plated coverage, not gold-plated) plus my out-of-pocket for the overage.  The amount of federal income tax saved on $15k won't be more than about $5250 for the highest (35%) tax bracket).  Compare that $5250 with the expense of my dropping the employer's plan and paying for my family's own private health insurance entirely out-of-pocket.

No contest: I keep the employer plan and pay taxes on whatever's above the threshold.

(There has to be a break point.  Admittedly, I did this quickly and I'm not a finance guy professionally.  Can someone check the numbers, reasoning, or just provide the fuller analysis?)

[Uisce Beatha]

"It's a bad policy," Rep. Charles B. Rangel, D-N.Y.

So right there I'm thinking, "hmmmm, this plan must have merit."   

[JDerion]

I have a plan that would costs more than 15K ($17,971.20 to be exact, more than double the amount I paid when I started this job in 1998), half of which I pay for out of my pocket, half paid by my employer. My youngest daughter had a rather simple speech problem we dealt with this year and my plan still left me holding the bag for another $11,000 out of pocket. So now I'm going to get taxed on top of all that?

This *feces* is totally out of control.

"It unwisely encourages workers to choose overly expensive, gold-plated plans. The result is that insurance premiums rise and many Americans cannot afford the coverage they need."

Huh? People choose gold-plated plans so they aren't forced to go to Dr. Nick Riviera as their only choice when their kids are sick. Basic insurance basically covers nothing.

[Aske]

TFT,  I will chime in some more later...


here is my real thought.  by offering this 'idea'  the 'idea' is to make  100% care  'gold' type plans   unaffordable (pay for them, and pay taxes on them!) and hence go off the market.  this is good for insurance companies profit margins..no longer caring for the truly sick at full cost.   this is HORRIBLE for anyone with pre-existing conditions , terrible accidents, etc.  where yearly medical costs exceed $100k  etc. 

no insuranace plan will ever be perfect, fair, or anything else, but this is simply a corporate profit scheme that truly effects the old, sick,  while not really offering a tangible benefit to any 'people' at all.   this will not lower health insurance costs for those who buy 'out of pocket' and have no work benefit.      its basically like how 'trickle down economics' supposedly works,  only in the sense of trickling down lower costs and coverages to the poor who can't buy insurance now.    the main issue seems if you are too poor to buy the insurance now (monthly payment) how is getting a tax refund at the end of the year going to help?   does anyone REALLY think insurance comps are going to drop rates 40-50-60%  if the 2-3% of the population with severe problems who benefit from 'gold' type plans suddenly can't afford them and can be dropped?
     

[Aske]

I have a plan that would costs more than 15K ($17,971.20 to be exact, more than double the amount I paid when I started this job in 1998), half of which I pay for out of my pocket, half paid by my employer. My youngest daughter had a rather simple speech problem we dealt with this year and my plan still left me holding the bag for another $11,000 out of pocket. So now I'm going to get taxed on top of all that?

JDerion, hasn't 2001-2006 shown you that  not being able to speak is no barrier to achieving positions of power, wealth, and influence in life?



j/k of course.  That sucks, and I truly empathize and understand.  We've (directly, aand via my mom and dad) seen the ugly side of med in this country in the last 5-10 years.

 

[JDerion]

I have a plan that would costs more than 15K ($17,971.20 to be exact, more than double the amount I paid when I started this job in 1998), half of which I pay for out of my pocket, half paid by my employer. My youngest daughter had a rather simple speech problem we dealt with this year and my plan still left me holding the bag for another $11,000 out of pocket. So now I'm going to get taxed on top of all that?

JDerion, hasn't 2001-2006 shown you that  not being able to speak is no barrier to achieving positions of power, wealth, and influence in life?



j/k of course.  That sucks, and I truly empathize and understand.  We've (directly, aand via my mom and dad) seen the ugly side of med in this country in the last 5-10 years.

 

Very true about not being able to speak.  Sadly, her Presidential aspirations may be down the *feces*ter since she's doing quite well now, no thanks to Aetna.