Posted on 08/01/2013 4:16:20 PM PDT by steve86
Not all companies that applied to sell new individual insurance plans inside Washington’s online exchange marketplace will be able to do so, the state’s insurance commissioner said Thursday. . . . But the 31 new plans available from four companies will give people in most counties plenty of choices, the insurance office said. And the approved rates are 1.8 percent lower than what the companies originally requested, for a total savings of more than $10 million. . . . Citizens and legal immigrants who make up to $45,960 and families of four making up to $94,200 a year may be eligible for subsidies if they buy their plans through the Health Benefit Exchange, which will be open to consumers on Oct. 1.
The plans take effect in 2014, and cover a wider range of benefits than most individual plans today, including those rarely covered now, such as prescription drugs, and maternity and newborn care.
New rules under the ACA limit out-of-pocket costs in most plans to $6,350 for individuals and $12,700 for families, including deductibles but not premiums. Plans can no longer have annual or lifetime coverage caps for essential health services. . . .
In some counties, those under age 30 also could choose a “catastrophic” limited-coverage plan offered by Group Health that would be less expensive than some others.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.com ...
The lower-level “bronze” plans approved by the insurance office have smaller premiums, but consumers will pay higher cost-sharing percentages; “gold” plans have larger premiums but smaller cost-sharing requirements.
To illustrate, the insurance office looked at premiums for the lowest-priced plan to be sold inside the exchange at each of the three levels, before subsidies, for three different hypothetical shoppers.
For example, a single 40-year-old non-tobacco user in King County could pay premiums ranging from $213 a month to $351.
A 21-year-old single non-tobacco user could pay from $166 to $274, and a similar 60-year-old from $504 to to $744 a month.
Remember this is mandatory.
How would an hourly worker getting 29 hours a week be able to afford any of this?
I wonder why some of the health plans were rejected.
Thought Community Health of Washington was supposed to be the flagship plan.
WA ping
Those subsidies will be pretty huge at the lower income levels. In addition, there is a good chance the hourly worker would qualify for Expanded Medicaid at no cost to him, at least in Washington State. (I’m not saying this is good or bad, just offering the info).
The can of worms begins to open...
Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler said some companies were new to the commercial market and weren’t able to guarantee access to certain providers and hospitals. “It’s our duty to make sure that if you buy a health plan, you can actually see the doctor or hospital that provides the service you need.”
OK, there's the answer to my question in the very article I posted! LOL
I have a question. If we assume that Obamacare survives, will the self-employed health insurance deduction still exist on the 1040? With these huge premiums (mine will be $700/month for just me), that is an important question. Does anyone know the answer?
It’s just income redistribution, nothing less.
I have been fortunate thus far to have never incurred a really big hospital bill. Can someone tell me -- does this "out-of-pocket cost" limit literally mean what it says -- that even if a hospital bills 7 million dollars that you are only responsible as an individual for $6,350 at the most? And this includes ER fees, surgeon's fees, everything? I know this is not a question specific to Obamacare but have never looked into it.
I read that it will be phased out but so many of those articles are speculation. Who knows.
There used to be almost twenty insurance companies doing business in WA. That was until the pre-existing conditions became mandatory. All left but these four.
No, I’m with a different company right now. I think these four are just the “inside the exchange” companies, no? The article states that six other companies have plans pending approval.
What gets me is the pricing. How will some people be able to afford it. And it’s mandatory. How will some minimum wage people pay for it?
Well, if they have zero dollars, they won’t, unless they’re put on Expanded Medicaid (very likely). But the subsidies are huge down there. Also, no lower-income people will have to pay the penalty because they are exempted due to it being too high a percentage of their income. The pain is going to be in the mid to high income levels.
I was wondering the other night if Australia has a national health plan. If so, do you know if it is similar to Canada’s?
Sounds a little like base line budgeting to me. Savings of $10 million from what...what the companies originally wanted? What is the cost increase/decrease over last year, or over the past five years. They gave all but $2.0 of what companies asked for. That doesn't mean premiums were lower.
supposed to read 2%
When I look up my own quote from Group Health it is just a bit higher than it was before, for a similar co-pay level. The benefits change somewhat so you can’t make an exact comparison but I don’t think the premiums are changing all that much.
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.
