Skip to comments.Obamacare open enrollment deadline is Jan. 31, and penalties are stiffer this year
Posted on 01/19/2016 11:23:27 AM PST by Citizen Zed
With less than two weeks of open enrollment left, Covered California is reminding consumers that they will face increased penalties for not having health insurance this year.
Since Obamacare's individual coverage requirement took effect in 2014, the federal government has imposed increasingly expensive fines to people who do not purchase coverage through health exchanges or obtain insurance through an employer or a government program such as Medicare. This year brings the highest penalty yet, Peter Lee, Covered California's executive director, said during a recent news conference.
"This is real money going straight to the IRS, where the consumer gets nothing in return," Lee said.
This year, the penalty is $695 per adult and $347 per child up to a family cap of $2,500 or 2.5% of household income, whichever is greater. Last year's penalty was $325 for adults, with a $975 maximum or 2% of household income.
People in lower income brackets can qualify for significant government subsidies that help pay monthly premiums, and many in those categories also qualify for health plans with lower out-of-pocket costs.
A recent study from the Kaiser Family Foundation estimated that of the nation's 7 million people who qualify for a subsidy, about half have incomes low enough to qualify them for a zero-cost bronze plan, which must cover at least 60% of the enrollee's healthcare costs.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I love the add.
Enroll in your healthcare.gov plan today so you are not fined $695.00.
That should be “ad” not “add”.
Lots of adverts on tv hyping Obamacare.
They cross out the outrageous high premium and show some low number.
Not pointing out you and I are making up the difference for the happy insured person.
I will never obey this unconstitutional statute or honor/respect these douchebag progressives.
Do the millions of illegals in Cali have to sign up too?
Only the ones filing tax returns, which I suspect is a very small number.
I always thought that coerced contracts violate the 16th Amendment.
Terrific. Can’t afford to buy and can’t afford the fine for not.
“Should you not obtain government mandated health insurance this year, feel free to apply for a government subsidy to pay the fine.”
Can’t afford the premiums, can’t afford the deductibles, can’t afford the fine.
So glad the government destroyed the private health insurance industry.
It’s so great you’re forced by law to get it.
When they say “up to x% of income...” they don’t mean of your take-home pay. They mean of your gross. So the percentage they give you is a lie.
I’m pretty sure the 16th only pertains to taxation.
That said, the 10th Amendment forbids, to the federal, all possible powers that may be construed besides those actually enumerated.
It’s simple set theory.
There is a finite, limited set of delegated Powers.
There is the theoretically infinite diversity of all other possible powers ... all forbidden.
In Marbury, Marshall outlined the two important things to consider when looking at the Constitution: the specific theory of written constitutions employed; the original right of those that Ratified to make what they agreed to the Law. The modern court acts as if neither matters. Even Scalia observed at one point that if such things were once again accepted the theory of modern jurisprudence would be invalidated.
Which highlights the fix we’re in. With the Court we aren’t approaching honorable men and women so that they preserve the Law. Instead we are approaching lawlerly whores and worse, being made to beg them to not rape us too bad this time....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.