Meds, Mind, Body & Benefits > Insurance, Benefits Programs & HIV

Some interesting facts on the Health Care Reform

<< < (2/16) > >>


--- Quote from: mpositive on March 25, 2010, 12:53:56 PM ---Effective Jan 1, 2011 for HRAs, HSAs and Health FSAs, over-the-counter drugs will no longer be reimbursed without a prescription.  Non-qualified distributions from HSAs will be taxed at 20% (currently 10%).
Ok, so that means, my FSA account will no longer pay for Aspirin, Tylenol and a host of other items.  What a huge bummer...that will cost me an extra few hundred dollars a year.  And 10% more tax on withdrawals from an HSA.  YAY!  ugh!

--- End quote ---

You can still ask your doc to prescribe those things for you and get reimbursed for them.

--- Quote ---Individuals with a pre-existing medical condition who have not had insurance coverage for six months or more may be able to enroll in a new federally subsidized insurance program that is to be established within 90 days of enactment and remain until 2014. Premiums for the pool will be established for a standard population and have a 4:1 age band.  Maximum cost-sharing will be limited to $5,950/individual and $11,900/family in 2010. [/i][/u]
Ok, so based on this, it appears that the maximum an individual will pay is $496.00 a month.  If I am reading it correctly..

--- End quote ---

$496 maximum/month in copays, but that's in addition to the premiums, which haven't been established yet.

--- Quote ---High income earners ($200,000 individual or $250,000 married filing jointly) will see their Medicare Part A (hospital) tax rate on wages increase to 2.35%, effective in 2013.
Not sure this is very fair....not that I fall under this category anymore anyhow.  But I am not a fan of punishing folks because they make more money, as it is, they pay more tax both in actual dollars and percentage of payroll income.

--- End quote ---

I have never fallen into it either but I think it's fair, we have some of the lowest tax rates for developed countries overall, and get the fewest benefits - in particular lack of healthcare. It's a fairly modest tax increase and the benefit is tangible, especially if you later retire early (with lower income, and no longer subject to the tax) and now have access to healthcare that you couldn't previously have access to.
Some of my coworkers with stock options will be hit and are bitching about it - I hope they stay healthy their whole lives. Short-term thinking ...

--- Quote ---Effective in 2013, reimbursed medical expenses may only be deducted on tax returns if they exceed 10% of adjusted gross income.  This increase is waived for individuals age 65 and older for tax years 2013 through 2016.[/u][/i]
Another bummer....

--- End quote ---

On the other hand, with access to insurance, your expenses should be capped to some smaller amount and thus the tax deduction wouldn't be as valuable. Currently the expenses are deductible only over 7.5% of AGI.

--- Quote ---Effective Jan 1, 2013, FSA contributions will be limited to $2500 annually. 
STOP!!!  That's another $500.00 or so dollars a year to an employee....WOWSA!  Ok, I know there are good things in this bill too, but man, I am getting smacked around here.

--- End quote ---

Yes, that one is a problem. I have been contributing slightly over that amount the last few years to my HSA. I can see how it would hurt families especially, vs the current $5,000 FSA contribution limit.


I think someone hit a really good point though, although still hate to see how much hate out there for folks that make a lot of money.  Personally, I never have, and never will prescribe to the thinking that everyone should make similar amounts and be happy with that.   SS tax should not stop, that I always thought was a little silly.  But otherwise, I am completely against punishing someone for making more money.  Of course, the means at which they make their money should certainly be an issue.

Did not realize that the $496 was for copays and such and not the premiums.  Wow, that is scary, I thought it was a good thing at that number, now it's gonna be tricky.

Someone who makes 200,000 a year still has much more disposable income than someone who makes 30,000 a year. 

That is not true at all.  I am not sure how you figure things out.  Then again, I am not sure where you live either. 
If the person making 200k lived like the person making 30k, then your answer would be correct....otherwise, it is seriously flawed.

No individual is taxed more than 49% of their income.  So 200k can never be less than 100k.  My income at 30k was about 25% so you do the math, unless the 200k guy was balling like a rockstar (and spending beyond his means) then yes his 100k is going to go further than my 22.5k post taxes.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version