Posted on 12/27/2015 11:59:42 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
"......Last year, 86 percent of those who signed up through the federal exchanges received tax credits on their insurance premiums. The credits are available for families earning up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level. For a family of four, the income limit would be about $94,000; a family of two, $62,000.
....Other customers found themselves starting over from square one when their insurance company pulled out of the Health Insurance Exchange or was dropped from the state exchange, like Meritus, Gussio said. Meritus, a nonprofit health care cooperative, was actually removed from the list of approved insurance companies in the Arizona Health Insurance Exchange because the state was concerned that Mertius might not continue to be solvent in 2016. Meritus will close for good on Feb. 1, he said.
Some private, for-profit insurance companies that offer plans through the Exchange are facing the same financial strain, he said. United Healthcare announced this year that it would probably would not offer plans on the Exchange in 2017.
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 36 percent of counties in states using Healthcare.gov will see a net decrease in the number of insurance companies that offer coverage within their borders, about 17 percent will see an increase and the bulk will remain the same. There is a total of 2,603 counties that use Healthcare.gov.
The Flagstaff area went from 56 plans offered by a variety of insurance companies for individuals to 19 this year, Gussio said.
People also are seeing an increase in their health insurance premiums, Gussio said.
"The costs for individuals is unbelievable," he said. "We've seen some very, very high premiums. I haven't seen an increase this big in the 20 years I've been working in the industry."
Most of the families purchasing policies sold on the federal exchanges, even those more expensive, will be eligible for tax credits, based on previous years' experience.
Some individuals have seen premium increases of more than 20 percent and some businesses have seen 40 to 60 percent increases, Gussio said. There have also been some decreases in premiums, but the majority of price changes have been increases.
According to a Kaiser Foundation poll of 1,202 adults between the ages of 18 and 64, 46 percent said they tried to get health insurance but found it was too expensive, even with government subsidies.
The increases are partially due to the number of health insurance companies that are going under or are merging with other companies, he said.
Many people are saying they would rather pay the penalty for not having insurance at all rather than pay $1,400 a month for insurance they may not use, Gussio said.
That's despite the fact that the average penalty for an individual not having insurance in 2016 will increase 47 percent to $969, according to a recent analysis by the Kaiser Foundation. The average penalty in 2015 was $661.
Lewis said for a family of three, two adults and a child, the penalty starts at around $1,737.
"That's school clothes or a house payment," he said. "I have not found a person who doesn't want health insurance. They want to be able to afford it. We're trying to show people what's available."
However, Lewis said, even with the price changes he has not had a problem helping people find a new health insurance carrier. In some cases, he's been able to help them find the same plan under a different company at a cheaper price.
Businesses with 50 or more employees are also looking at paying the penalty rather than purchasing health insurance for their employees, Gussio said. He's had a handful of business clients come in asking about the 50 or more employee mandate that goes into effect in 2016.........." Full story
You are spot on!
First of all, companies with a little over 50 employees should put some on contracts.
Second, with the purchase of insurance mandated that means companies selling more policies. Why would prices go up?
Finally, republicans should have been pointing out, and the argument before the supreme court, should have been that it’s called “THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT” but it hasn’t nothing to do with “affordable care”. It’s insurance.
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.