The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

By Mark Zdechlik, Minnesota Public Radio (TNS)

About half of all American adults get health insurance through their employer, and beginning in 2018, the government will impose heavy financial penalties on any employer-provided health plans it deems overly generous. The tax was designed to rein in health care inflation and raise tens of billions of dollars.

Former Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., a member of the working group that created what’s come to be called the Cadillac tax, says if companies were more demanding shoppers, then insurers — as well as doctors, hospitals and other health care providers — would have stronger incentives to keep prices low.

“I think we saw it as a way to keep the cost of health care from continuing to grow at the rate that it had been growing,” Bingaman said.

Under the Affordable Care Act, any health plan for employees that costs more than $10,200 annually for an individual, or $27,500 for a family, will be subject to the tax. For those plans, any amount over those caps will taxed at 40 percent.

All agree the rule will raise cash: The Congressional Budget Office estimates the tax will generate $87 billion for the federal government by 2025.

Estimates on how many employer plans will be subject to the tax vary widely. Consulting firm Towers Watson says that as many as half of these company plans are on track to trigger the Cadillac tax in 2018.

Still, being on track to get hit and actually paying the tax are different things, said Elise Gould of the Economic Policy Institute.

“Health insurance providers are going to provide plans that are cheaper,” she said. “And, all else equal, cheaper plans are thinner plans, which means that consumers are going to have to pay more out-of-pocket.”

Opponents of the tax fear that more out-of-pocket costs for consumers will add to the difficulty many Americans already have paying their medical bills, now that high-deductible health plans are commonplace.

“Trying to control health care costs by sharply increasing peoples’ out-of-pocket costs is not good health policy because it discourages people from getting care that they need,” said Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., who is leading a House effort to scrap the tax. Bipartisan bills aimed at repeal are already making their way through both the House and Senate, even though repealing the tax would increase the budget deficit.

“The opposition has really grown like wildfire,” Courtney said. “I dropped my bill back in February with a handful of co-sponsors; we’re up to 145 on my legislation.”

Some business groups, including many health care companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, support repealing the tax, as do many unions. And several presidential candidates on both sides have said they want it repealed.

But a large number of economists, including Henry Aaron of the Brookings Institution, are publicly urging lawmakers to let the tax stand. In a letter sent this month to congressional finance leaders, the economists write that Congress should “take no action to weaken, delay, or reduce the Cadillac tax until and unless it enacts an alternative tax change that would more effectively curtail cost growth.”

Speaking from his own experience as a patient, Aaron says that without such a tax, motivating doctors and patients to hold the line on expensive tests is very difficult.

“I could tell you stories,” he said, “(W)here doctors interacting with me were quite explicit in saying, ‘Well, are you covered for insurance on this? If so, let’s do it. I’m not sure it’s going to make any difference in your treatment, but you’ll feel better.'”

The tax could cut annual U.S. health spending by 3 percent to 4 percent — as much as $60 billion by 2024, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Still, said economist Jared Bernstein, “I don’t think that it’s going to be nearly as biting as lots of people claim.” Plans deemed excessive would only be taxed on the amount that surpasses the annual limit, he explains.

“So the issue isn’t, ‘How many plans are over the threshold?” he said. “It’s ‘How much of the plans’ costs are over the threshold?’ And if you look at that, you get a much smaller number.”
The Cadillac tax is the latest in a string of attempts to bring down the cost of health care by shifting more of the bill to consumers — encouraging them to be savvier shoppers. Some critics of that approach, however, say it dodges the real problem: how much hospitals, doctors and other health care industry players charge.
___
(This story is part of a partnership that includes Minnesota Public Radio, NPR and Kaiser Health News. Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a nonprofit national health policy news service.)

Photo: A primary care office where healthcare spending happens. David Prasad/Flickr

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Rep. Devin Nunes

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet

Republican Rep. Devin Nunes of California is retiring from Congress at the end of 2021 to work for former President Donald Trump.

Keep reading... Show less

From left Ethan Crumbley and his parents Jennifer and James Crumbley

Mug shot photos from Oakland County via Dallas Express

After the 2012 massacre at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, then-Rep. Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican, evaded calls for banning weapons of war. But he had other ideas. The "more realistic discussion," Rogers said, is "how do we target people with mental illness who use firearms?"

Tightening the gun laws would seem a lot easier and less intrusive than psychoanalyzing everyone with access to a weapon. But to address Rogers' point following the recent mass murder at a suburban Detroit high school, the question might be, "How do we with target the adults who hand powerful firearms to children with mental illness?"

Keep reading... Show less
x
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}