DescentBB

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 5:50 pm**

OK, this is really starting to rankle me. My plan is grandfathered and was bought on the individual market over 4 years ago. My premium rates already went up in September, supposedly in response to Obamacare starting up. Now, I get this letter in the mail from my insurance company last week telling me that my premium rates are going to rise YET AGAIN, on January 1st, by about 2.5%:

"to cover the Affordable Care Act's TAX on health plans"

What "tax on health plans" and how did they arrive at that particular percentage? I don't have a "Cadillac Plan", I certainly don't make over $200,000 (I wish) and my current plan pretty much covers what all the ACA plans cover, except that I have a $7500 deductible. My insurance company's letter was typically content and information free, and Googling comes up with all sort of new taxes and fees being imposed on insurers because of the ACA, which I'm assuming are going to be passed on to consumers.

Slick, or can someone else who actually thinks that they understand the workings of Obamacare, show me a government link, or ANY link, that will tell me succinctly what new fees and taxes are going to be imposed as the ACA comes online and how the insurance companies are determining the amounts of these taxes and fees to change rates, especially for grandfathered plans? I've looked and looked, but can't find an informative and unbiased site with all the information. It's a rat's nest. Everything concerning the ACA is so hidden or obfuscated it makes it near impossible to tell who's going to pay what. Not good Mr. Obama. You've managed to piss off those with grandfathered plans now.

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 6:08 pm**

Remember, 'they had to pass it before you get to see what's in it'.
And that dictate was delivered with a fair bit of condescending attitude by Pelosi at the notion her ruling class was even questioned about the content!

So remember that next time you think you favor one half of that class over the other!

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 6:55 pm**

Someday when I tell people business doesn't pay taxes...they will listen.

I know this is a little unrelated, but everyone always clamors for government to tax "those businesses" well every item that a business pays for is in a list called expenses, and guess who must pay all of those expenses...the consumer of course.

So pay a tax, or pay it in extra consumer costs...same difference.

How it pertains to your post tc…well a business doesn’t always apply a cost increase only to the item that is costing more, they spread it out over the entire line.

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 7:21 pm**

TC, you are(and have been, for a while, I suspect) been hosed by an insurance company. Now, I've never had a plan that I didn't have to renew annually, so I don't know quite what to make of one which you bought 4 years ago, and quietly accept the changes they made ever since. Still, they are essentially lying to you, and as I have said before, you should get yourself to the exchange for your state ASAP. You might be surprised, both at the premiums, but also the coverage, and possibly the tax rebate you might get.

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 7:32 pm**

There are 20 new taxes or tax increases directly connected to Obamacare

yes TC your rates went up because of obamacare. regardless of how slick tries to spin it. Its not the big bad insurance companies that are at fault for this one.

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 7:46 pm**

CUDA wrote:There are 20 new taxes or tax increases directly connected to Obamacare

Such as ?

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 8:21 pm**

• 2.3% Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers 2014

• 10% Tax on Indoor Tanning Services 2014

• Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike

• Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals which fail to comply with the requirements of ObamaCare

• Tax on Brand Name Drugs

• Tax on Health Insurers

• $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives

• Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D

• Employer Mandate on business with over 50 full-time equivalent employees to provide health insurance to full-time employees. $2000 per employee $3000 if employee uses tax credits to buy insurance on the exchange (marketplace). (pushed back to 2015)

• Medicare Tax on Investment Income 3.8% over $200k/$250k

• Medicare Part A Tax increase of .9% over $200k/$250k

• 40% Excise Tax "Cadillac" on high-end Premium Health Insurance Plans 2018

• An annual $63 fee levied by ObamaCare on all plans (decreased each year until 2017 when pre-existing conditions are eliminated) to help pay for insurance companies covering the costs of high-risk pools.

• Medicine Cabinet Tax
Over the counter medicines no longer qualified as medical expenses for flexible spending accounts (FSAs), health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs), health savings accounts (HSAs), and Archer Medical Saving accounts (MSAs).

• Additional Tax on HSA/MSA Distributions
Health savings account or an Archer medical savings account, penalties for spending money on non-qualified medical expenses. 10% to 20% in the case of a HSA and from 15% to 20% in the case of a MSA.

• Flexible Spending Account Cap 2013
Contributions to FSAs are reduced to $2,500 from $5,000.

• Medical Deduction Threshold tax increase 2013
Threshold to deduct medical expenses as an itemized deduction increases to 10% from 7.5%.

• Individual Mandate (the tax for not purchasing insurance if you can afford it) 2014
Starting in 2014, anyone not buying "qualifying" health insurance must pay an income tax surtax at a rate of 1% or $95 in 2014 to 2.5% in 2016 on profitable income above the tax threshold. The total penalty amount cannot exceed the national average of the annual premiums of a "bronze level" health insurance plan on ObamaCare exchanges.

Posted: **Sun Dec 01, 2013 10:45 pm**

Thanks.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 7:22 am**

and not one of those on your list of 'taxes'(including at least one, I note, that was passed before ACA), would justify TC getting a cost increase.
Excuses, excuses......please put the blame where it deserves to be placed.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 7:47 am**

Then quit making them.
thread title "hidden obamacare taxes"

Everyone of those were taking off the politifact site. And deemed as associated with obamacare.

So I AM putting the blame were it belongs. Obviously you cannot.

and on a side note. Debbie Wasserman called looking for you. Your DNC taking point spokesman paycheck is ready.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 8:35 am**

CUDA wrote:Then quit making them.
thread title "hidden obamacare taxes"

Everyone of those were taking off the politifact site. And deemed as associated with obamacare.

So I AM putting the blame were it belongs. Obviously you cannot.

and on a side note. Debbie Wasserman called looking for you. Your DNC taking point spokesman paycheck is ready.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 8:53 am**

callmeslick wrote:and not one of those on your list of 'taxes'(including at least one, I note, that was passed before ACA), would justify TC getting a cost increase.
Excuses, excuses......please put the blame where it deserves to be placed.

This one would…

• Tax on Health Insurers

But most increases will probably come from all of the extra requirements of coverage. (we will all see the added costs of those subsidies in the future either in tax rates or deficit)

As I said companies will spread the cost over all of their customers, not just those with new plans, and yes it is hard to tell an annual increase from any the ACA will cause…

How convenient!

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 9:04 am**

all this returns to my repeated observation: This is why we needed a public insurance option in the ACA. Damn shame it was filibustered out of the bill.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 11:13 am**

callmeslick wrote:TC, you are(and have been, for a while, I suspect) been hosed by an insurance company. Now, I've never had a plan that I didn't have to renew annually, so I don't know quite what to make of one which you bought 4 years ago, and quietly accept the changes they made ever since. Still, they are essentially lying to you, and as I have said before, you should get yourself to the exchange for your state ASAP. You might be surprised, both at the premiums, but also the coverage, and possibly the tax rebate you might get.

You misunderstand Slick. I kept and renewed that policy for 4 years willingly and without changes. In fact, the September right before that infamous date of March 23, 2010, they plied me with requests to make changes to my plan. Uh, huh. I almost raised my deductible to $10,000, but I'm glad I didn't do it because that would have dumped my grandfathering THIS year. Thanks to those later added regulations (Pelosi is deluded), I didn't even know about that little gotcha back then, but I did sense a trap. So I stuck with my plan because the premiums were still decent and that $7500 deductible was fine by me. They even added all the freebies for women's health care well before the ACA came into effect, so it's already pretty close to what Obamacare offers now, at a far lower price, even with that BS of a "tax" factored in. Sure, I could pay more to get a lower deductible, but why? I'd really like a higher deductible and a lower premium, but you can't get that on Obamacare here in Oregon. Besides, I don't intend to use health care unless I really need it. Even then, I'd have to think long and hard about it first. The system just makes my blood pressure spike every time I go into the doctor's office. Then they want to ply me with blood pressure meds instead of dealing with the reasons I went in there first place.

Now I think somewhere in CUDA's list is the reason for my little federal tax hike. I ran across those when I was searching. But it's really a bogus excuse to raise my and other people's rates just to keep their profit margins up in the face of Obamacare and insurance coverage for all (notice I said "insurance coverage", not actual health care), so why not blame the government who created this mess in the first place? What I'd like is for these insurance companies to at least be honest. If my insurance company wants to "tax" me and raise my rates to make up for their lost profits, then throw the blame the feds, at least tell me in writing that's what they're up to. If it is a true "tax", then give me the pertinent regulation that applies to my plan. Fat chance. Disingenuous bastards, and I'm talking about the private insurance companies, not the feds. I already know the Dems are lying through their teeth to make this turd of a law even work.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 11:38 am**

I'll still stick to the opinion that it isn't THAT bad of a law, when fully implemented,but that full cooperation from all states, full funding for implementaton and the adoption of a public insurance option all would have made it FAR better. It would be nice to see the political class get behind those changes, instead of 'repeal it' and leave us with the known pile of crap we had before the ACA.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:19 pm**

I think I found out what this tax is. It's called the HIT, or Health Insurance Tax. It hits small businesses and the self-insured individual market, not big businesses of course. I like the acronym, because it's sure a HIT job to small businesses and individuals who buy their own insurance. And it sounds like it gets worse and bigger over time. If Obamacare sticks around, I may have to go to the exchange just to get a better rate, because right now, I'm essentially financing expanded coverage for everyone on Obamacare AND it looks like my premiums are going to keep going up over the next several years because of this "tax". What galls me is that I'm doing the right thing by getting my own coverage like I should, but I'm getting penalized just to pay for expansion of that coverage for everyone else. What we have here in Obamacare is a hybridized form of socialized medical insurance. The rub is that private insurance is part of the mix, and it's not for the good of the entire system in the long run. You want single payer Slick? We need to get rid of private insurance all together, but the downside is that we'd have some form of rationing so that the government doesn't go bankrupt running the thing.

http://www.nfib.com/research-foundation ... urance-tax

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/h ... 96425.html

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 2:44 pm**

The ACA is a sham from start to finish, here’s the perfect example:

One of the key concepts was to have all of these young healthy people get into the insurance pool to help offset the costs of the new requirements, and the sick.

So good in theory…right…

Except, they decided to subsidize these people with taxpayers money, and the result is old sick people like me, end up subsidizing the young and healthy instead.

Of course the obvious counter to that is, well you get a subsidy as well…talk about voodoo economics.

Posted: **Mon Dec 02, 2013 2:49 pm**

callmeslick wrote:... It would be nice to see the political class get behind those changes, instead of 'repeal it' and leave us with the known pile of crap we had before the ACA.

What would be FAR better would be if we had no "political class".....no need for that term in our lexicon at all....and our laws were created instead by citizen legislators who put the quality and integrity of representation of citizens above the wealth and power of any self serving group you could try to assign to them!!

And really, all you need is a truly objective and tenacious media/press talking to an intellectually curious populace to make that more the standard than the silly fantasy.
A media that would have shamed Pelosi out of office in under a week for ever saying 'we need to let them pass it before they can tell us what is in it...' and a citizenry that would have unanimously cheered "Good riddance" when it happened regardless of her party affiliation because that would have been beyond acceptable.
Instead we have all joined the 'team'...either team D or R, like cowed high school freshmen afraid of the cool upper classmen and have accepted their manipulative, condescending and totally deceptive methods as our own.

Posted: **Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:35 pm**

TC, be careful of using the Feds website. Besides being wide open to hackers, it is now coming to light that when you think you are enrolled in a plan, the insurer may not of gotten the info and thus you are not really insured. Of course you won't know that until you need to use it and find out you've been dumped in a black information hole.

Posted: **Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:38 pm**

callmeslick wrote:I'll still stick to the opinion that it isn't THAT bad of a law, when fully implemented,but that full cooperation from all states, full funding for implementaton and the adoption of a public insurance option all would have made it FAR better.

Right slick, that's why such a good law has the President delaying the employer mandate until after the 2014 elections and giving exemptions out to his buddies like Halloween candy.

Posted: **Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:31 pm**

woodchip wrote:TC, be careful of using the Feds website. Besides being wide open to hackers, it is now coming to light that when you think you are enrolled in a plan, the insurer may not of gotten the info and thus you are not really insured. Of course you won't know that until you need to use it and find out you've been dumped in a black information hole.

Fortunately, I don't have to use the website this year. I'm grandfathered into my present plan. Now, if my insurance company drops me in the future and Obamacare is still around, I might have to.

Posted: **Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:53 pm**

woodchip wrote:TC, be careful of using the Feds website. Besides being wide open to hackers, it is now coming to light that when you think you are enrolled in a plan, the insurer may not of gotten the info and thus you are not really insured. Of course you won't know that until you need to use it and find out you've been dumped in a black information hole.

more scare tactics. I used the website, got my plan, got a good price, the insurer knows I have the policy(and thoughtfully sent me a bill, and I saved over 700 bucks per month, and my 25 year old daughter got better coverage. Scary, indeed!

Posted: **Tue Dec 03, 2013 8:40 pm**

I'd happily use the website, but I'm pretty sure that because our governor is an ★■◆● and didn't implement the Medicaid expansion, I fall underneath the minimum income for subsidies, so it'd pretty much be the same as paying out-of-pocket. Corbett needs to get bent.

Posted: **Wed Dec 04, 2013 7:49 am**

Top Gun wrote:I'd happily use the website, but I'm pretty sure that because our governor is an ★■◆● and didn't implement the Medicaid expansion, I fall underneath the minimum income for subsidies, so it'd pretty much be the same as paying out-of-pocket. Corbett needs to get bent.

for emphasis: USE THE DAMN WEBSITE!!!! If I get several hundred a month in rebates, and am nowhere close to any Medicaid eligibility, I can't help but think you would, too. See my example in the other thread. I wouldn't even be using my whole rebate for a Silver plan.

oh, and yes, Corbett is a tool. But, I was always astounded how many people who should have seen that, going in, still voted for the bought-and-paid-for hired hand of the gas industry.

DescentBB

Obamacare's hidden taxes

Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes

Re: Obamacare's hidden taxes