Way back in Aught Eight, Bob posted on an interesting, and growing, phenomenon:
"[A] poll conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a leading health policy research group, found that in the past year 7 percent of U.S. adults married so one or the other could get on a partner's health insurance plan."
He remarked at the time that this was quite extraordinary, and wondered if we'd be seeing more of this.
Well, we may never know, because thanks to The ObamaTax, that avenue is being quickly cut off:
"By denying coverage to spouses, employers not only save the annual premiums, but also the new fees ... This year, companies have to pay $1 or $2 “per life” covered on their plans, a sum that jumps to $65 in 2014"
That extra fee is to help offset the cost of adding so many folks to the rolls of the insured, thereby making insurance even more expensive (very Orwellian, really: "we'll cut your premiums by 3000% by increasing your premiums"). New ObamaTax regs will require employers to offer coverage to dependent children (if by "children" you mean "26 year old adults"). Curiously, though, there's no such provision (yet) requiring such coverage for spouses. This has been going on for a while now: many employers require working spouses - whose employers offer health insurance - to take that coverage instead. This latest just codifies the practice.
Of course, that presents a new challenge: what if the spouse's employer doesn't offer coverage, or the spouse doesn't work outside the home? The Exchanges seem tailor-made for this, if they work as advertised.
Any bets on that?
"[A] poll conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a leading health policy research group, found that in the past year 7 percent of U.S. adults married so one or the other could get on a partner's health insurance plan."
He remarked at the time that this was quite extraordinary, and wondered if we'd be seeing more of this.
Well, we may never know, because thanks to The ObamaTax, that avenue is being quickly cut off:
"By denying coverage to spouses, employers not only save the annual premiums, but also the new fees ... This year, companies have to pay $1 or $2 “per life” covered on their plans, a sum that jumps to $65 in 2014"
That extra fee is to help offset the cost of adding so many folks to the rolls of the insured, thereby making insurance even more expensive (very Orwellian, really: "we'll cut your premiums by 3000% by increasing your premiums"). New ObamaTax regs will require employers to offer coverage to dependent children (if by "children" you mean "26 year old adults"). Curiously, though, there's no such provision (yet) requiring such coverage for spouses. This has been going on for a while now: many employers require working spouses - whose employers offer health insurance - to take that coverage instead. This latest just codifies the practice.
Of course, that presents a new challenge: what if the spouse's employer doesn't offer coverage, or the spouse doesn't work outside the home? The Exchanges seem tailor-made for this, if they work as advertised.
Any bets on that?
Posts
