Uncategorized

POLICY: More on Mass, by Eric Novack

Sometimes (perhaps too often!) I agree with Eric Novack. Here’s what he writes about the pay or play version of the new Mass plan:

The recently passed bill in Massachusetts, well reported here at THCB, aims to provide ‘universal health insurance’ to state residents through personal and employer mandates, plus Medicaid expansion. It still has not been signed/ modified by Governor and future GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, but the state legislature is already threatening to override any changes the governor might make.

I want to focus briefly on the employer mandate. The law, if unchanged, states that employers who do not provide health insurance would be assessed $295 per employee per YEAR. That’s right. Employers would pay about $300 per year per employee if coverage is not offered.

Does anyone see the problem? Most small businesses spend close to $300 per MONTH per employee now, for ‘good’ coverage.

Math never looks good in print, so I’ll make this example brief. Small business, ‘Matt’s Place’, has 20 employees. Currently, covering health insurance for those 20 costs 20 x $300 x 12 months = $72,000 per year. (That’s $6000 per month.)

Under the Massachusetts plan, if ‘Matt’s Place’ did not provide coverage, it would cost about 20 x $300= $6000 per year.

Hmmm. $72,000 versus $6000. And the employees would still be covered with insurance. And the company saves $66,000. A small business. Hmmm.

Any idea what is likely to happen?

I do not like predictions (my crystal ball is rather cloudy). But here is one. Within 3 years the number of small businesses offering insurance plummets. The ability of the state to cover expenses in a system that has no utilization controls plummets. And the state is forced to raise some combination of income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, business taxes or completely revise the system.

But I am not against the experiment. I could be wrong.

Livongo’s Post Ad Banner 728*90

Categories: Uncategorized

Tagged as: ,

11
Leave a Reply

11 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
Roccovoip internet phonefree spins vid insättningG. Hinson, MDPeter Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Rocco
Guest

Music lovers entertain themselves with FM for different
moods at different times. Learning how to drive is considered
to be in the priority list of a lot of growing adults.
Well, here are a few questions to ask and our answers to them.

voip internet phone
Guest

If it requires a big portion of technical services then a flat
rate service by incorporating service level agreements is a useful one instead of an incident based support.
This might cause a lot of confusion in the minds of customers who might think
that the company is trying to avoid answering their queries or problems.
The court will consider the earning capacity of
the two parties as well as whether the supported spouse helped to support the other while he or she was getting an education or maintaining their career, and to what extent.

free spins vid insättning
Guest

Actual income is deposited by credit card,
wire transfer or any of numerous other secure types income transfer, into your
account with the on the internet casino.

my page free spins vid insättning

G. Hinson, MD
Guest
G. Hinson, MD

The uninsured, and under-insured, come in to my office all the time. I do not turn anyone away based on whether or not they have insurance. Some of my best-paying customers are migrant workers without insurance. All the docs in my town also cover the ER on a rotating basis and agree to see the patients without physicians for necessary follow-up, irregardless of their ability to pay. Hospitals are not able to turn anyone away irregardless of their payer status. I am not sure who you are referring to regarding doctors “working the system,” but, of course, there are unethical… Read more »

Peter
Guest
Peter

Mr. Hinson, I didn’t think the uninsured who couldn’t pay went to single physicians, or at least that the docs even allowed them past the front door. They usually go to the urgent care or ER. Some will go to free community clinics who may benefit from this plan. As for beaurocracy, the U.S. “system” is overflowing with it, while the single provider government pay system (from those godless “socialist” countries) has much less for docs and hospitals. And all the providers get paid. But you know even docs figure out ways to boast their incomes by “working” the system.… Read more »

Tom Leith
Guest
Tom Leith

> So aren’t all employers really looking at paying > higher taxes if they drop health coverage, PLUS > the $300 per employee? Eric is exactly right. I’ll do a little illustration though. If the employers keep the $3,600 for themselves, they will pay $300 as a new tax, and then pay the normal corporate income tax on the $3,300 (which runs around 40%). So the employer would be better off by at least $1,980 per employee. i.e. This is how much their net income will go up if they drop insurance coverage and keep all the money. As Eric… Read more »

G. Hinson, MD
Guest
G. Hinson, MD

Peter, I do not disagree with your overall assessment of this plan, but you’re taking it a little too far with the providers reaming the taxpayer rhetoric. This bill, heavily supported by the large Boston hospitals, still will just help them recover from the amount of free care they provide now. It will not help them increase prices to get more out of everyone. The small group or solo physician will likely break even, or even suffer more losses in dealing with increased bureaucracy. On the one hand, fewer people will come in to be seen without any source of… Read more »

Peter
Guest
Peter

Any program that does not control costs by providers is doomed to fail. The best explaination of this plan I have heard so far is, “no provider left behind.” Canada’s plan is probably the most controlled for provider costs and it is always grappling with costs and services. Wait until businesses and health providers learn the loopholes of this plan and start to download costs to the State. The details of this plan are non-existent but the biggest idea thrown out by the politicians so far is the “$200-$300” mandatory premium paid by unisured individuals, yea like that is going… Read more »

Eric Novack
Guest

Rick- currently, health insurance premiums are a tax deduction for company income taxes. Most companies show a ‘zero’ income at the end of the year (through paying employees, owners, etc.). The savings in the example above would go to (1) hiring more employees, (2) making capital investments in the business, (3) higher salaries for employees, (4) greater income for owners.
In the example I gave (a very realistic one, BTW), you could give every employee $2000 and pay the payroll tax and still have an extra 5-10K left over for the owners of the business.

Rick
Guest
Rick

Aren’t we forgetting something, though? Don’t employers get a tax credit for offering employee health insurance, and would they not lose that by dropping coverage? So aren’t all employers really looking at paying higher taxes if they drop health coverage, PLUS the $300 per employee? Seems to me the Massachussets legislature is crazy like a fox. Yes, indeed, it may well have to expand state programs to cover for employers that drop coverage, but it will be collecting more than enough in higher tax revenues to make it a wash. I guess someone who knows the details should answer this.

Tom Leith
Guest
Tom Leith

Tom and Matt are riding up from the lobby of our office condo building in the suburbs of Boston. Tom says, “Well, I know you are not alone in dropping health insurance as a benefit, however disappointing it is for all of us. Does this mean I get a $3,300 raise?” Matt begingly smiles and says in a soothing tone, “Oh, of course! I won’t dream of decreasing your total compensation because you are such a good and loyal employee, and I want to keep you!” and immediately steps off the escalator.
t