iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Health Care Reform Could Get You A Raise, But There's A Catch

Torn Money

First Posted: 03/14/2012 12:59 pm Updated: 03/14/2012 1:12 pm

The good news is that health care reform could lead your employer to put a little more money in your paycheck. The bad news is that if they do, it's probably because they aren't providing you with health insurance anymore.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 4 million fewer people will get health benefits from their employers in 2016 compared to what the agency projected a year ago. More people will end up on Medicaid, the government health program for the poor, and more companies will decide to stop offering health benefits and let their workers buy their own coverage through insurance "exchanges" the government will establish in 2014. The Congressional Budget Office doesn't estimate how much wages might increase for those who lose company health benefits.

How could this translate into bigger paychecks for workers? Economists consider health insurance to be part of how much companies "pay" workers because fringe benefits cost them money, said Paul Fronstin, director of the Health Research & Education Program at the Employee Benefit Research Institute. If a company decides to stop providing health insurance, they are likely to pay a little more. Companies may choose to offer workers extra money that could be used to help pay for health insurance instead of providing benefits themselves.

The Congressional Budget Office also says this will allow the government to raise more money to pay for health reform because wages get taxed but money spent on workplace health benefits doesn't. Employers that drop workers from their insurance rolls also will pay penalties to the government.

Jobs would remain the most common way for Americans to get health insurance. The new projections about health care reform don't say fewer people overall will get insurance at work, just a smaller number than the budget agency previously thought. This year, 154 million people are covered by their employers and 161 million will be in 2016, the Congressional Budget Office says.

There's no guarantee things will play out that way. Economic and budget projections are constantly changing and the parts of the health care law that are supposed to expand coverage don't exist yet. Moreover, Fronstin said, economists' assumptions about companies treating benefits like pay aren't always accurate in the real world.

"Economists assume it happens but there are examples when it doesn't," said Fronstin, an economist himself. During the recent recession and the sluggish recovery, many employers cancelled fringe benefits like matching payments to 401(k) retirement plans, he said. But they weren't more likely to drop health benefits than they were before the recession, he said.

The Congressional Budget Office has revised its estimates about how much health reform will cost, how many people will get insurance and other effects numerous times since Congress passed it in March 2010. One big reason for the differences is that overall economic projections in areas like employment keep changing, which affects aspects of the law such as how many people will be uninsured in 2014 and beyond and how many people will earn a low enough wage to qualify for Medicaid or for tax credits to help them afford private health plans.

Thirty million people who otherwise would have gone without health insurance will have benefits because of health care reform programs by 2016 and the share of Americans with coverage will rise from to 93 percent from 82 percent, the budget office predicts. Last year, the agency said health reform would expand coverage by 33 million, which would mean 95 percent of Americans were covered. The government will spend $1.1 trillion between this year and 2021 to cover these people, about $50 billion less than the Congressional Budget Office predicted last year.

Photo by flickr user photosteve101

FOLLOW HUFFPOST MONEY

The good news is that health care reform could lead your employer to put a little more money in your paycheck. The bad news is that if they do, it's probably because they aren't providing you with hea...
The good news is that health care reform could lead your employer to put a little more money in your paycheck. The bad news is that if they do, it's probably because they aren't providing you with hea...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 249
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
hagenjr
Shovel ready freeborn son of the Republic
09:40 PM on 03/16/2012
smoke and mirrors for the sheeple.

hurry, get in line lemmings the cliff is right ahead.
06:02 PM on 03/15/2012
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=203424

Yeah, we're going to cut the deficit in half in my first term, right? (Obama promise)

Truth?

The Congressional Budget Office has extended its cost estimates for President Obama's health care law out to 2022, taking in more years of full implementation, and showing that the bill is substantially more expensive -- twice as much as the original $900 billion price tag.

In a largely overlooked segment of the CBO's update to the budget outlook released Tuesday, the independent arm of Congress found that the bill will cost $1.76 trillion between now and 2022.

Oops.

This is how Washington works folks. Make claims that are patently false. On purpose.

Rig the scoring so the numbers come up "as you want", pass it, then stick the taxpayer with the truth later on. When called on it tell the people that if they don't put up with another $2 trillion immediately in borrowing authority that a meteor of a mile diameter will strike their house and lay waste the entire nation -- tomorrow.

As expensive as it is, the CBO predicts the law will actually reduce the deficit because it increases the income from a range of tax increases and penalties on individuals, employers and insurance companies -- by $81 billion more than last year's projection.

No it won't because those tax increases won't happen. We've already seen that, right? We had a "temporary" reduction in the payroll tax that Congress now can't let expire, ...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Under Fed yet Fed Up
Always great distaste for both political parties
04:43 PM on 03/15/2012
As someone owning a business in the US this healthcare issue has been very important to me. My employees currently enjoy 100% paid premium healthcare with no deductible and low co-pays. But I will be subject to "cadillac plan" penalties when the full ACA is implemented.

I've been in negotiations to sell this busness to my employees for the past several months. This healthcare issue has been critical in the profitability of the company. It looks like we'll still make a deal. But my employees have decided that I must reduce the number of employees to less than 50 so "their" company does not have to pay the 'cadillac plan" penalties.

How is that for an irony when it comes to the intent of the ACA?
02:12 PM on 03/15/2012
Guess we should have read it....
On the bright side, student loans were addressed in the bill
05:53 AM on 03/15/2012
THat is exactly what happened to me..................I received from my company 2 raises in 15 years...............My company lost its contract with its customer in 2009, when American businesses were laying off 700K employees per month...................I was hired by the new contractor who noticed I did not take HC insurance from my old employer..................WITHOUT MY ASKING, they gave me an 8% raise on the spot..................With the world's economy collapsing; with 4 million jobs lost the year before, with economic chaos rampant, I get an 8% raise without asking.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cvermeulen9
And you thought it could never happen!
08:49 AM on 03/15/2012
Yes but do you have Insurance? And if you do are you paying more than 8% including deductable? And is the coverage as good as a " group Policy"? OR are you receiving LESS benifits and paying more money?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
atlasusa
low tolerance for stupid low information arrogant
09:12 AM on 03/15/2012
Great questions ! I think you and I know the answers.
My wife took opted for corporate employment as it provided a group policy that was much less costly and provided much better benefits. We are reasonably healthy middle-age adults and the net financial benefit to us MONTHLY having the group policy is easily more than $1100............ per MONTH !
11:28 PM on 03/14/2012
really,,, adding 30 million new policies was suppose to decrease the cost, wasn't it? oh, i forgot, that hasn't even happened yet. imagine the increase when that little increase happens,,,,,
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blndgenie
As a matter of fact, I DID build that..
09:32 PM on 03/14/2012
you'll need a raise since the maximum YEARLY out of pocket expense in those affordable 'exchanges' is up to $6000/single, $12,000/family. PER YEAR. GOOD TIMES!
photo
Craig Casey
Nobamacare! Entitlements & taxes must be cut.
10:00 PM on 03/14/2012
Young attempts to put a positive spin on 4 million people losing health insurance, then claims they'll get a raise? Mr. Young omits the fact that the government will be fining these employers $2000-$3000 per employee, causing massive layoffs of low skilled workers.

Talk about screwing your base! Nice ploy to candy coat the inevitable.
05:48 AM on 03/15/2012
The ACA is loaded with tax breaks for employers to offset those fines.
photo
Mister Grumpy
An Angry American
09:21 PM on 03/14/2012
The exchanges already exist but the insurance offered isn't worth purchasing.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blndgenie
As a matter of fact, I DID build that..
09:34 PM on 03/14/2012
the herd will find out when they get dumped into them by their employers. $12,000/employee/year, or $2500/fine/employee/year. Hmmmmmm...........let me think about that............
photo
Craig Casey
Nobamacare! Entitlements & taxes must be cut.
10:03 PM on 03/14/2012
Obamacare is an excuse to give Obama constituents fat contracts. Millions to his buddies insurance co-op & force healthcare providers to use IT of his donors.
08:46 PM on 03/14/2012
we were told that Oboma care would cost 900 billion over ten years. yeah we knew it was front loaded ,the 1st 4 years we paid and got nothing and the pay outs didn't start tilll year 5. well .. if you go out to about 11-12 years and look back 10 years. actually cost is not 900 billion. it is between 2 and 2.5 TRILLION DOLLARS !!!! don't the american people ever get tierd of the lies and deception????/
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blndgenie
As a matter of fact, I DID build that..
09:34 PM on 03/14/2012
OMG YOU MEAN THEY L I E D? I guess they 'found out what's IN THE BILL!" LMAO!
photo
Craig Casey
Nobamacare! Entitlements & taxes must be cut.
10:09 PM on 03/14/2012
Obamacare will cost over $5 trillion is the US last to see this disgrace survive 10 years. Thank God it has his name on it, and not "Craig Casey Casey." What a financial train wreak! http://www.cobrahealth.com/Obamacare-unaffordable.html
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:46 PM on 03/15/2012
You and your friends that have paid insurance through your company or have the cash to buy whatever policy you want cannot see the real world.I have been self insured for 40 years.How about you?I pay $450.00 per month for a $5,000.00 deductible with no co-pay..Now what is your monthly cost?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:31 PM on 03/14/2012
T.R. Reid, correspondent and author of "The Healing of America" , hosted a one-hour PBS show, "Sick Around the World", comparing the health care systems of the U.S., Britain, Switzerland, Germany, Taiwan, and Japan. It's available for viewing at:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/
FRONTLINE: sick around the world |PBS

Only Britain has socialized medicine; the other four countries use social insurance like the U.S., but limit the profits on the base insurance:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/
Five Capitalist Democracies & How They Do It | Sick Around The World | FRONTLINE | PBS

These graphs compare the health care systems of Japan, Britain,Switzerland, and Germany to the U.S.:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/etc/graphs.html
FRONTLINE: sick around the world: Graphs: U.S. Health Stats Compared to Other Countries | PBS

A review of "The Healing of America":

http://www.tomhull.com/ocston/books/reid-healing.php
Tom Hull: T.R. Reid: The Healing of America

"...(pp. 13-14):
The academics have a term for this approach to problem-solving:

"comparative policy analysis." The patron saint of comparative policy analysis was an American military hero who went on to become our thirty-fourth president: Dwight D. Eisenhower. That's why this book is dedicated to his memory..."
08:26 PM on 03/14/2012
A large number of other employers I talk to are doing one of two things.

They are either dropping their plans and paying the fine, or they are breaking up the business into divisions and keeping the unit headcount under 50 so as to avoid the ACA requirements entirely.

Hooray government.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blndgenie
As a matter of fact, I DID build that..
09:35 PM on 03/14/2012
just wait until all of it kicks in...........the amount of people left with their group coverage will be miniscule. So much for the 'if you like your plan you can KEEP IT!" OMG TOO FUNNY!
photo
Craig Casey
Nobamacare! Entitlements & taxes must be cut.
10:06 PM on 03/14/2012
The joke is that even if you get on government medicaid, no doctor that wants to pay his bills will see you! http://www.slideshare.net/CraigJCasey/reasons-why-i-hate-obamacare/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:15 PM on 03/14/2012
The Deficit Commission considered the eliminatio­n of the employers' tax deduction for job-based health insurance:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/28/health-care-tax-break-deficit_n_788852.html
Job-Based Health Care Threatened

"WASHINGTO­N — Job-based health care benefits could wind up on the chopping block if President Barack Obama and congressio­nal Republican­s get serious about cutting the deficit.

Budget proposals from leaders in both parties have urged shrinking or eliminatin­g tax breaks that help make employer health insurance the leading source of coverage in the nation and a middle-cla­ss mainstay.

The idea isn't to just raise revenue, economists say, but finally to turn Americans into frugal health care consumers by having them face the full costs of their medical decisions.

[snip]

Repealing the tax break would raise several hundred billion dollars a year, depending on how it's done. Many economists believe employers would boost pay if they didn't provide health care..."

Anyone who thinks employers would boost pay to compensate is delusional­.
photo
donk970
Hard working member of the 99%
07:30 PM on 03/14/2012
The question of wether to go to a single payer system like Germany has or stick with the health insurance quagmire that we have boils down to simple numbers. In a single payer system everyone pays an "insurance premium", a tax, that is manageable for everyone because the cost is spread out over the entire population not just the older, sicker, subset that can afford insurance and the cost is a percent of income so that people who don't earn much have a lower premium.

A single payer system would benefit small business because it would allow them offer competitive wages that they can't afford now because health insurance is out of reach.

Of course there are those who want to punish those who work for so little that typical health insurance premiums are more than they make but these people should try to understand that we already pay for the uninsured with our tax dollars anyway. We might as well formalize the arrangement with a single payer system and save ourselves a whole lot of grief.
08:27 PM on 03/14/2012
Ah, in other words the 51% of people not paying taxes now should get healthcare paid for by those already paying all the bills already...... ha!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:34 PM on 03/14/2012
An article on the 47% who don't pay federal income tax...

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/10/signs-of-dissent-what-about-the-47-who-pay-no-federal-income-taxes/246721/
Signs of Dissent: What About the 47% Who Pay No Federal Income Taxes? - Derek Thompson - Business - The Atlantic

"...Who pays no federal income taxes? I think I have the picture you're looking for. This piechart shows the households paying no FIT, with all inset numbers in thousands of dollars (i.e.: 20-30 means $20,000 to $30,000). The big takeaway is that more than half of the folks who pay no federal income tax make less
than $20,000 a year. It is also true that 7,000 millionaires paid no federal income tax last year (more on that factoid here)...."

Many of the 47% give something more far more precious than money: their young to serve in the U.S. military.

http://www.politicususa.com/half-americans-taxes/
It's A Myth That 47% Of Americans Pay No Taxes, In Truth 86% Pay Taxes
08:58 PM on 03/14/2012
in 1984 only 14% of the population paid no fed. income tax you are correct today 49% pay nothing , and some of them get tax refunds!!! but according to the democrates those of us who suppport ourselves and the other half of the country need to pay more ..we need to pay our "fair share". wether its a crook who breaks into your house at nite and steals, or a democrate run fed. gov. who keeps raising my taxes to buy the votes of the 49% a thief is still a thief.
photo
donk970
Hard working member of the 99%
07:10 PM on 03/14/2012
All that ever needed to be done was to provide a public health care option that would allow anyone to buy into medicare (pay a premium just like with insurance). If they had just done that one thing we could have thrown out all of the hundreds of pages of the health care plan. Why didn't that happen? Because the health insurance companies and big employers want to keep a stranglehold on health care.
photo
thereisonlyoneparty
more amazing than you
11:59 PM on 03/14/2012
Your posts show how little you know about medical care in the US and n the world.

the issue is not the payer.  The issue is always the costs.  How can any society manage the costs of health care?

This is only rarely addressed.  Other nations do it, but not the US.  In American the costs are ignored.  Coverage and access are considered, but they do not matter.
10:44 AM on 03/15/2012
I agree with the reisonlyoneparty....

donk970, you seem to know very little of health care system. medicare buy-in is not a viable option for many reasons. you are overlooking some serious hurdles:
1. guarantee issue and community rating leads to super high premiums because only the chronically ill will "buy-in".;
2. medicare is terribly expensive - especially any associated perscription benefits (you know that the govenrments pharma full-retail price on drugs?);
3. medicare operates on a fee-for-service model which means the doctors have an incentive or overutilize/overbill - there is very little medical management to tame cost;
4. so much more problem

You may want to check your facts before you take a position.
photo
donk970
Hard working member of the 99%
11:40 AM on 03/15/2012
So basically you are suggesting that we nationalize the whole health care system and completely overhaul it so that it's more efficient. I'd be all for that but it'll never pass in our profit mad free market for every problem society.
06:51 PM on 03/14/2012
if you don;t currently have health insurance you will be a winner under the new healthcare law but if you currently have health insurance through work you will be a loser because you may lose it and at best it will end up costing the currently insured more.