More and more, Obamacare is looking like the ultimate case study in unexpected consequences. AEI’s Scott Gottlieb:
A family of four with an aggregate income of more than $88,000 annually or an individual earning around $44,000 could find themselves badly strained by healthcare costs under the Obama plan.
Many of these folks currently get their health coverage from work. They benefit from an implicit subsidy built into that workplace coverage that lets them spend pre-tax dollars through their employer to purchase health insurance.
Under the Obama plan, many of these families could instead find themselves buying their health insurance on the new state-based exchanges that get started in January 2014. For a family of four, premiums on even one of the lower priced “silver” options could still cost more than $15,000 annually on the exchanges.
Only their incomes will make them ineligible for the “premium assistance credits” that are meant to offset some of the cost of buying the pricey comprehensive coverage that the Obama plan mandates. These families will also no longer have the benefit of being able to defray some of these costs by spending pre-tax dollars.
People aren’t forced to carry health coverage on the exchanges if the cost of these policies exceeds 8 percent of their pre-tax income. But many families may find that the exchanges crowd out other low cost insurance options. Even if these families aren’t forced to buy one of these exchange policies, they may find few alternatives.
Do the math: A family of four earning $90,000 annually takes home about $60,000 after local, state, and federal taxes. If they lose workplace coverage, and move onto the exchanges, they could find themselves spending as much as 25 percent of the family’s take home pay for an average policy ($15,000 for the “silver” plan).
That’s just on premiums. If they get sick, they could be stuck with another $11,500 more in deductibles and cost sharing, and this doesn’t include co-pays on drugs. The upshot is that the exchange-based insurance is broad but not very deep. While full coverage for a lot of routine care is mandated under these plans – raising the cost of the insurance policies – the overall co-pays on other stuff can still be steep.
1. We don’t know how many people will be ejected into the exchanges as employers choose to accept the $2,000 per worker penalty for dropping coverage. At least at larger companies, health benefits are certainly a way of attracting talent. But the number could be sizable.
2. Employers could raise salaries as a form of compensation for dropping coverage.
3. Government could raise the subsidy levels for insurance purchased within the exchanges. But it would take more than the Buffett rule to fund that.
So we may be looking at a scenario where individuals have to pay a lot more for health insurance or perhaps pay higher taxes to fund Obamacare—or both.