IRS: Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Be $20,000 Per Family

IRS: Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Be $20,000 Per Family | CNS News


(CNSNews.com)? In a final regulation issued Wednesday, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assumed that under Obamacare the cheapest health insurance plan available in 2016 for a family will cost $20,000 for the year.
Under Obamacare, Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.
The IRS's assumption that the cheapest plan for a family will cost $20,000 per year is found in examples the IRS gives to help people understand how to calculate the penalty they will need to pay the government if they do not buy a mandated health plan.
The examples point to families of four and families of five, both of which the IRS expects in its assumptions to pay a minimum of $20,000 per year for a bronze plan.
?The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000,? the regulation says.
Bronze will be the lowest tier health-insurance plan available under Obamacare--after Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Under the law, the penalty for not buying health insurance is supposed to be capped at either the annual average Bronze premium, 2.5 percent of taxable income, or $2,085.00 per family in 2016.
In the new final rules published Wednesday, IRS set in law the rules for implementing the penalty Americans must pay if they fail to obey Obamacare's mandate to buy insurance.
To help illustrate these rules, the IRS presented examples of different situations families might find themselves in.
In the examples, the IRS assumes that families of five who are uninsured would need to pay an average of $20,000 per year to purchase a Bronze plan in 2016.
Using the conditions laid out in the regulations, the IRS calculates that a family earning $120,000 per year that did not buy insurance would need to pay a "penalty" (a word the IRS still uses despite the Supreme Court ruling that it is in fact a "tax") of $2,400 in 2016.
For those wondering how clear the IRS's clarifications of this new "penalty" rule are, here is one of the actual examples the IRS gives:
?Example 3. Family without minimum essential coverage.
"(i) In 2016, Taxpayers H and J are married and file a joint return. H and J have three children: K, age 21, L, age 15, and M, age 10. No member of the family has minimum essential coverage for any month in 2016. H and J?s household income is $120,000. H and J?s applicable filing threshold is $24,000. The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000.
"(ii) For each month in 2016, under paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(2)(iii) of this section, the applicable dollar amount is $2,780 (($695 x 3 adults) + (($695/2) x 2 children)). Under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, the flat dollar amount is $2,085 (the lesser of $2,780 and $2,085 ($695 x 3)). Under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the excess income amount is $2,400 (($120,000 - $24,000) x 0.025). Therefore, under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the monthly penalty amount is $200 (the greater of $173.75 ($2,085/12) or $200 ($2,400/12)).
"(iii) The sum of the monthly penalty amounts is $2,400 ($200 x 12). The sum of the monthly national average bronze plan premiums is $20,000 ($20,000/12 x 12). Therefore, under paragraph (a) of this section, the shared responsibility payment imposed on H and J for 2016 is $2,400 (the lesser of $2,400 or $20,000).?

this is good shit, they are going to give this shit for free probably to the worthless scum of America, but then force other people to buy into this crap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jay_steel

this is good shit, they are going to give this shit for free probably to the worthless scum of America, but then force other people to buy into this crap

---

agreed

Health Insurance 101

How do these plan levels work with insurance subsidies for low- and moderate-income people?

Starting in 2014, the ACA provides assistance to low- and moderate-income people up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) (about $88,000 per year for a family of four) who need help paying insurance premiums and out-of-pocket expenses. The amount of premium assistance each individual or family receives is related to the coverage tiers. The subsidy is based on the premium for the second lowest-cost silver plan available. A silver plan will cover 70 percent of the average costs, with the enrollee paying, on average, 30 percent. However, if an individual decides to purchase a gold or platinum plan, he or she will need to pay the difference between the premium credit amount and the cost of the more expensive plan. This may be a good choice, since the person will get a more generous level of coverage of, on average, 80 percent of costs.

Individuals and families under 250 percent FPL (about $27,000 for an individual and $55,000 for a family of four) are also eligible for sliding scale cost-sharing credits. This, in addition to premium credits, will help defray any co-payments, co-insurance and deductibles. To get the cost-sharing credits, the individual has to enroll in a silver plan, and would then get assistance with the out-of-pocket expenses (meaning they would pay less than the average 30 percent of health care expenses).

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...500_AA300_.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jay_steel

this is good shit, they are going to give this shit for free probably to the worthless scum of America, but then force other people to buy into this crap

---

You understand that if you have private health insurance that you already subsidized the health care costs of people that have no health insurance before Obamacare.
You pay for it indirectly with increased private insurance premiums and higher medical bills related to cost shifting by health care providers from the uninsured to the insured.

In addition, people with no health care insurance usually generate higher health care costs due to them not receiving treatment until their health care condition gets more expensive to treat as well as increased health care cost related to them using hospitals as primary health care providers for the same type of health care treatment that people with insurance use primary care practitioners for.

All of this increased cost is shifted by health care providers from the uninsured to the insured.
This is one of the ways that Obamacare is projected to reduce health care costs overall, something that the current private health care provider sector has failed at.
It will make it less costly to treat people who will access under Obamacare lower cost health care providers than hospitals as well as treat them sooner before their medical conditions require more extensive care and thus increased medical costs.

Idaho Republican Compares Obamacare To The Holocaust | ThinkProgress

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/.../01/nuxoll.jpg

A state senator in Idaho is expressing her distaste for President Obama's health care reform law by drawing a comparison
between the private insurance companies participating in Obamacare and the "Jews boarding the trains to concentration camps"
during the Holocaust.

:coffee:

did you hear about the new proposal that they want to start pulling money from retirement plans and 401k's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowden

You understand that if you have private health insurance that you already subsidized the health care costs of people that have no health insurance before Obamacare.
You pay for it indirectly with increased private insurance premiums and higher medical bills related to cost shifting by health care providers from the uninsured to the insured.

In addition, people with no health care insurance usually generate higher health care costs due to them not receiving treatment until their health care condition gets more expensive to treat as well as increased health care cost related to them using hospitals as primary health care providers for the same type of health care treatment that people with insurance use primary care practitioners for.

All of this increased cost is shifted by health care providers from the uninsured to the insured.
This is one of the ways that Obamacare is projected to reduce health care costs overall, something that the current private health care provider sector has failed at.
It will make it less costly to treat people who will access under Obamacare lower cost health care providers than hospitals as well as treat them sooner before their medical conditions require more extensive care and thus increased medical costs.

---

This is not just about cost. It's also about quality of care. You better believe that the quality of care is going to decrease dramatically. It will no longer be about individualized treatment, it will be about numbers and quotas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowden

You understand that if you have private health insurance that you already subsidized the health care costs of people that have no health insurance before Obamacare.
You pay for it indirectly with increased private insurance premiums and higher medical bills related to cost shifting by health care providers from the uninsured to the insured.

In addition, people with no health care insurance usually generate higher health care costs due to them not receiving treatment until their health care condition gets more expensive to treat as well as increased health care cost related to them using hospitals as primary health care providers for the same type of health care treatment that people with insurance use primary care practitioners for.

All of this increased cost is shifted by health care providers from the uninsured to the insured.
This is one of the ways that Obamacare is projected to reduce health care costs overall, something that the current private health care provider sector has failed at.
It will make it less costly to treat people who will access under Obamacare lower cost health care providers than hospitals as well as treat them sooner before their medical conditions require more extensive care and thus increased medical costs.

---

I have tri-care i dont deal with that bull shit inflated cost. however, my buddy pays close to 900 a month for his family of three because he runs his own company, and my step dad who is HMO words law enforcement pays 750$ a month. That shit is stupid period. This is not going to give any one a break, but the poor and drive up the middle classes taxes. As much as Obama wants to say that the rich are the ones that will be paying the tax we all know that there is not enough money in the rich even if they are taxed at 80% to cover this bull shit. We are going to get taxed the fuck out of and it might be more worth it to make less money and slang gear on the side.

and everyone thought the middle class wouldnt get fuk'd

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by secdrl

This is not just about cost. It's also about quality of care. You better believe that the quality of care is going to decrease dramatically. It will no longer be about individualized treatment, it will be about numbers and quotas.

---

the quality of care plummeting honestly doesnt bother me that much... because i dont need doctors for anything except for bloodwork, which is simple enough..

it just means that natural selection will be taking its course way more often, which is a good thing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Standard Donkey

the quality of care plummeting honestly doesnt bother me that much... because i dont need doctors for anything except for bloodwork, which is simple enough..

it just means that natural selection will be taking its course way more often, which is a good thing

---

You'll rue the day you made that statement when you have multiple organ failure before turning 30 :coffee:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jay_steel

As much as Obama wants to say that the rich are the ones that will be paying the tax we all know that there is not enough money in the rich even if they are taxed at 80% to cover this bull shit. We are going to get taxed the fuck out of and it might be more worth it to make less money and slang gear on the side.

---

top economists in the world have stated time and time again the US deficit could be paid off in a blink of an eye, has nothing to do with Obama it has to do with mathematics. those that make the most in the US are doing it off the backs of labor and a corrupt but legal financial system. anybody that thinks they "earn" their money doesn't understand banking at all or they work in finance.

the BIS reported in 2008 that the derivatives market was trading over 1.14 quadrillion annually. 1/10 of a percentage on that would be 500B annually.

the IRS reports about $450B a year in tax avoidance from individuals and small business. obviously not from wage workers as they are taxed before they even get their own money.

corporate tax avoidance runs about 250-500B a year

tax havens about 400B a year

a non-regressive payroll tax another 150B a year

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theCaptn'

You'll rue the day you made that statement when you have multiple organ failure before turning 30 :coffee:

---

think about it... if i had multiple organ failure.. will i make it to the doctor? lmao



but im actually less concerned about my health now than i ever have been due to my diet/supplement/new aas/slin regimen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Standard Donkey

think about it... if i had multiple organ failure.. will i make it to the doctor? lmao



but im actually less concerned about my health now than i ever have been due to my diet/supplement/new aas/slin regimen

---

You got no excuses for not being jerked n desirable :lol:

Just think of how much lower healthcare would cost if profit, and the push to squeeze ever more profit, were taken out like it used to be. That is where the high cost is coming from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaphod

Just think of how much lower healthcare would cost if profit, and the push to squeeze ever more profit, were taken out like it used to be. That is where the high cost is coming from.

---

Just imagine how great health care would be if we had universal health care ran by govt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swiper

Just imagine how great health care would be if we had universal health care ran by govt.

---

my room mate is an african american (yes i dropped the racism, i have to grow up sometime dont i?).


Conversation went like this: (translating from ghetto-slobber into english)


AA Room mate: "Hey SD, i think healthcare and education should be free, dont you?"
Me: "..... ..... ..yeah bro"


universal suffrage... worst idea ever. (guess who he voted for)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swiper

Just imagine how great health care would be if we had universal health care ran by govt.

---

with a properly ran government that did not work exclusively for the markets, very inexpensive. as the other country's in the OECD clearly show.

OECD Health Data 2012

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swiper

Just imagine how great health care would be if we had universal health care ran by govt.

---

Quit making vague statements. Stand for something. For once.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaphod

Quit making vague statements. Stand for something. For once.

---

I'm standing up for a govt take over of healthcare. how dare a company try to make a profit!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LAM

with a properly ran government that did not work exclusively for the markets, very inexpensive. as the other country's in the OECD clearly show.

OECD Health Data 2012

---

yeah it's so great all the wealthy come hear for major operations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swiper

yeah it's so great all the wealthy come hear for major operations

---

according to whom, the media? people come to the US for cancer and other special treatment or procedures, that's about it. and they come here to go to very specific medical facilities like the Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, UCLA, Sloan-Kettering, and such or where a specific doctor can be found. wealthy American's go to other country's for treatment for a variety of treatments and for cosmetic surgery's, etc. wealthy foreigners just don't come to the US to go to the local hospitals! LMAO...

a medical visa falls under the B-2 category which for 2011 was roughly 4.5M people
or .064% of the total global population. far from a "large" percentage of the global wealthy population, it's only about 25% of the total and with out breaking down the number of B-2 visa applicants nobody really knows what type of treatment was being sought by those coming into the US since the information is confidential.

and why does the US spend so much on cancer treatment? couldn't be because we are a unhealthy nation full of fat bastards that eat a bunch of crap. which is why we have one of the highest overall cancer rates in the OECD. wealthy nations have higher incidents of cancer than in low income country's.

cause and effect

you talk a whole lot but never know the details about anything...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LAM

according to whom, the media? people come to the US for cancer and other special treatment or procedures, that's about it. and they come here to go to very specific medical facilities like the Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, UCLA, Sloan-Kettering, and such or where a specific doctor can be found. wealthy American's go to other country's for treatment for a variety of treatments and for cosmetic surgery's, etc. wealthy foreigners just don't come to the US to go to the local hospitals! LMAO...

a medical visa falls under the B-2 category which for 2011 was roughly 4.5M people
or .064% of the total global population. far from a "large" percentage of the global wealthy population, it's only about 25% of the total and with out breaking down the number of B-2 visa applicants nobody really knows what type of treatment was being sought by those coming into the US since the information is confidential.

and why does the US spend so much on cancer treatment? couldn't be because we are a unhealthy nation full of fat bastards that eat a bunch of crap. which is why we have one of the highest overall cancer rates in the OECD. wealthy nations have higher incidents of cancer than in low income country's.

cause and effect

you talk a whole lot but never know the details about anything...

---

yeah like i said the wealthy come here for operations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swiper

I'm standing up for a govt take over of healthcare. how dare a company try to make a profit!

---

Judging by your sarcasm you don't mind the increasing costs of healthcare, then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LAM

a medical visa falls under the B-2 category which for 2011 was roughly 4.5M people
or .064% of the total global population. far from a "large" percentage of the global wealthy population, it's only about 25% of the total and with out breaking down the number of B-2 visa applicants nobody really knows what type of treatment was being sought by those coming into the US since the information is confidential.

---

I don't know where you cut-and-pasted that from, but the logic is faulty. You wrote, ".064% of the total global population." What itty-bitty percentage of the world qualifies as rich? It's around 30 million as of 2011. Better yet, what the percentage of rich outside the USA?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LAM

and why does the US spend so much on cancer treatment? couldn't be because we are a unhealthy nation full of fat bastards that eat a bunch of crap. which is why we have one of the highest overall cancer rates in the OECD. wealthy nations have higher incidents of cancer than in low income country's.

cause and effect

you talk a whole lot but never know the details about anything...

---

O'Rly? Source. Denmark, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Belgium, and France all rank above the USA in cancer frequency per country.

"you talk a whole lot but never know the details about anything..." Indeed, you do not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaphod

Judging by your sarcasm you don't mind the increasing costs of healthcare, then?

---

at least you admit costs are going up under Obama care. And no i don't like the rising costs associated from obama's healthcare law

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Standard Donkey

the quality of care plummeting honestly doesnt bother me that much... because i dont need doctors for anything except for bloodwork, which is simple enough..

it just means that natural selection will be taking its course way more often, which is a good thing

---

wait until you tear some thing bro then you will be wishing you can get the best orthopedic surgeon around. I had a buddy who is a professional athelete whose insurance wanted him to see a specific dr. The care was horrible and the dr's time of recovery was over a year.. He tore every thing in his knee. Paid out of pocket the difference for a different surgeon one who is ranked number 1 in the west coast and was training again in 3 months. Quaility of care is critical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swiper

at least you admit costs are going up under Obama care. And no i don't like the rising costs associated from obama's healthcare law

---

Costs were already going up, Obamacare didn't change that. So you're okay with healthcare costs going up purely for increasing profit?