Biden admin plots fix to Obamacare's 'family glitch,' expand coverage

MSN ^ | April 4, 2022 | By Adam Cancryn

[Oldeconomybuyer]

The new policy is designed to close a loophole in the ACA known as the “family glitch” that’s prevented an estimated 5 million people from qualifying for subsidized health plans — even when they can’t find affordable coverage elsewhere.

Biden administration officials are expected to unveil the proposed regulation ahead of a celebration of the landmark 2010 health law that will also mark former President Barack Obama’s return to the White House for the first time since he left office.

Democrats and health advocacy groups have long pushed for a fix to the family glitch, which locked certain Americans out of subsidized coverage due to the complex way the federal government determines eligibility for family members of workers who have access to employer-based health plans.

“Fixing the family glitch is the most consequential thing they can do without Congress to improve the affordability of ACA coverage,” said Larry Levitt, KFF’s executive vice president for health policy.

[BenLurkin]

Commies gotta commie.

[duckman]

Every day another surprise from this bunch.

[HonorInPa]

[From The Deer Stand]

A bottomless pit of money, errr, debt.

[DoughtyOne]

bilge back butter

[ALX]

‘’ Democrats last year also expanded ACA subsidy eligibility as part of the passage of the American Rescue Plan, and enrollment through the law’s insurance exchanges reached 14.5 million last year, a record high. Those expanded subsidies are due to expire later this year’

————

The 1.9 trillion America Rescue Plan was passed by reconciliation and the magnitude of this democrat fleecing is hard to describe. They just took the dollar figure from the Covid bailout and redirected it to themselves. I don’t think most republicans have a clue about this

[Carriage Hill]

BS; ∅bummer never left the WH. He's been pulling Bidet&Co's strings since 1/21/21.

[antidemoncrat]

“Biden admin plots fix to Obamacare’s ‘family glitch,’ expand coverage”

Whatever this crowd of morons does you can bet it won’t benefit America or the American people ... benefit illegals yes, unions yes, climate change aka elite socialists yes.

[cnsmom]

Still trolling for a legacy.

[Irenic]

Romney will be there to help, that much I know.

[SuperLuminal]

Wars, floods, hurricanes, winter blizzards, vaccine deaths & injuries, fuel prices, food prices, and any other sort of tragedy are prime (sometimes orchestrated) distractions while the stinking communists who rule this country continue to find ways to solidify or expand the tyranny which now envelops us...

It is so comforting to know that we have the dynamic, kick-ass GOP in the front lines fighting to restore our formerly-Constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms & liberty...
Snicker...

[GenXFreedomFighter]

Oh great, so my $6,000 premium, high-deductible plan that lets me pay for nearly all the medical and Rx expenses my family will incur this year out of pocket will get even more expensive. Yay!

[Jacquerie]

Not a single pubbie voted for Zero-Care. Amazing.

Nanzi told her caucus they had to vote for the bill to find out what was in it.

John Roberts “saved” Bammy’s “signature legislation.”

Just keep voting . . . as if it matters.

[momincombatboots]

First you expand coverage to. All.. then the natural laws of supply n demand will occur. The VA is a real time example of it. But hey.. the healthcare you can’t get is provided by vax kneelers.

[Topcatfl]

This is an interesting article, and I just had a conversation with a colleague about this very topic last week. I am absolutely convinced that the original writers of the ACA bill thought affordability would be 9% (approximately) of family income for family coverage. However, in the weird way that they act favorably to employers sometimes, the IRS concluded that there was no way for an employer to determine family income. Therefore they applied the 9% rule for single coverage only. Here is the salient fact, if the health care is not affordable under the safe harbor methodology, then the employer is assessed (in 1984 speak) a “shared” responsibility of $3000 per employee for each employee who receives a subsidy from the ACA marketplace. So consider the math, taking into account that family coverage can hit 3 thousand a month. If an employer even contributes 2/3 of the total cost, (not feasible for many industries), they are not going to make the affordability threshold for the greatest majority of their employees. Even some families with 80 or 90k of earnings may opt for the marketplace.

Last year, they took off the ceiling on subsides. It used to be that if your income was at 4x the federal poverty level for your area, you did not qualify for the subsidy. That doesn't come into play anymore. In a real-life example, most employers would not have more than 60% of their employees/dependents enrolled at any given time unless coverage was free or almost so. Looking down the road, this could have a severe financial impact at a precarious time.