Better Under the McCain Health Plan

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2001
Better Under the McCain Health Plan
17
Mon, 10-27-2008 - 2:26pm

 

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 10-27-2008 - 2:40pm
Does anyone know if the tax credit can also be applied towards employer-sponsored insurance or only towards privately purchased insurance?
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-05-2004
Mon, 10-27-2008 - 2:40pm
I have insurance through my employer and my employer pays the burden of the cost.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Mon, 10-27-2008 - 2:43pm

But see, that is because your insurance is too fancy. You should switch to a bare-bones policy with a high deductible.

I am not buying the McCain proposal, btw. It sounds like a disaster in the making.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Mon, 10-27-2008 - 4:14pm

>"It is much more likely to be a plan with higher deductibles that is more focused on providing true insurance against catastrophic losses rather than a more generous plan that includes a lot of prepayment for routine and predictable medical expenses. But this is precisely one of the objectives of the policy: to reduce the current tax bias that encourages people to funnel routine health expenses through insurance policies."<


Why would I not want my insurance to cover semi-annual physicals, mammograms, blood tests & such? Why would I want to pay a high deductable?


 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Mon, 10-27-2008 - 4:31pm

Dr. Lois Shaw is a senior consulting economist for the Institute for Women's Policy Research, and formerly was with the U.S. Government Accountability Office and Ohio State University's Center for Human Resource Research. She explained the difference in the healthcare grades at a news conference today.



"Senator McCain’s plan offers a tax credit to offset the cost of buying private insurance or contributing to an employer’s plan. But, insurance companies often deny coverage to those with known health problems, and Senator McCain does not adequately address this problem. We rate Senator McCain’s plan as worth only a C- as the credits offered are not large enough to cover costs for many women. Senator Obama offers a national plan that would make coverage available for all who chose to apply. He would also offer more help than Senator McCain does for those with low and middle incomes. While Senator Obama’s plan stops short of universal coverage for adults, it does mandate universal coverage for children. The Tax Policy Institute estimates that Senator Obama’s plan is likely to achieve more coverage than Senator McCain’s. Still Senator Obama’s plan rates only a B- because, without a universal mandate, younger and healthier adults may decide not to purchase insurance, driving up costs for others."


In a recession, they argue in the report, women and children will have an especially hard time.



"The financial crisis and the threat of severe recession make it particularly important that the next president be cognizant of the problems that women face, and be determined to address those problems. Women of all ages and children will be among those hardest hit by the recession because they already comprise a majority of Americans living in poverty. And women perform a majority of low-wage and unpaid carework in precarious economic circumstances.It is important that the policies taken to deal with economic distress account for the situation and interests of American women and their families."


 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-03-2008
Mon, 10-27-2008 - 4:32pm
Exactly! Even with my DH's ins with his Employer I still have paid close to 100.00 for a UTI! and I had to pay 84.50 for my annual exam! I guess because I needed a tetnus shot. Do you know where I go charges between 60-90 dollars for a strep throat check if you don't have ins? The Rapid check is only 19.00 but isn't suposed to be as accurate so they say. Insurance is the biggest rip-off, and McCain 's plan will help ins companiesy more who the heck is he trying to kid!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 9:25am

With high deductibles many would put off going for an annual physical. Then a treatable

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-03-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 9:40am
Like there is going to be any money "left over". I was thinking why nobody has asked McCain that! Why he wants to tax Health ins from your Employer!
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2001
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 9:46am

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/28/news/economy/health_care_and_election/?postversion=2008102807


As part of McCain's plan, employees would lose the tax exemption for company-sponsored health insurance. Instead, taxpayers would get a refundable tax credit of $2,500 for single filers, or $5,000 for families, to cover the costs of insurance bought on the job or on their own in the individual market.


By doing this, McCain would level the playing field between those who get insurance on the job, where benefits aren't taxed, and those who buy it their own, where it is subject to tax. The tax credit would let more of the uninsured afford coverage.


Obama, on the other hand, is promising to push employers to cover more Americans as part of his health care proposal. He would require larger companies provide insurance to employees or contribute toward the cost of a national plan, while giving small businesses a tax credit to entice them to offer coverage to their workers.


McCain's tax proposal

Under McCain's plan, employees would get taxed on the value of their health insurance, which on average costs $12,680 per year for a family, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Workers pay an average of $3,354 in premiums, while their employers cover the rest.


Most employees have their premiums deducted from their paychecks without paying tax on them. So, if you make $50,000, you are likely paying tax on only $46,646 of income.


Under McCain, your taxable income would rise to $59,326. If you were in the 25% tax bracket, it would mean an additional $3,170 in taxes.


But this increase would be knocked back by the $5,000 tax credit. So in the end, you'd actually have $1,830 to put in a health savings account, which could be used to cover premiums and other medical expenses.


Obama's employer coverage expansion

Obama's approach is very different. The Democrat would require larger companies to provide "meaningful coverage" for their staffs under a "pay or play" system. If they don't provide insurance, they would have to subsidize the cost of a national plan.


Small businesses, which would be exempt from this provision, would receive a new refundable tax credit of up to 50% of the premiums paid on behalf of their employees. They could also join a new National Health Insurance Exchange, which Obama envisions would provide public and private plans to individuals and small employers.


This could entice smaller employers to provide coverage, said Jennifer Tolbert, principal policy analyst at the Kaiser Family Foundation.


Currently, only 49% of small businesses provide health care coverage, down from 57% in 2000, according to the Commonwealth Fund.

Photobucket

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-03-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 9:51am
Well, my DH pays 4,500 a year for our Ins. PLUS, wh have a 3,000 Family deductable, meaning they hardly pay for anything until that amount is reached. It MAKES NO SENSE to tax Health ins! I don't like it, we would be screwed. Just like we've been screwed by a Republican pres the last 8 years!

Pages