In the Senate Health Bill, Some are More Equal than Others

If your employer doesn’t provide you with health insurance, your federal subsidy will be 2½ times larger, according to James C. Capretta:

Consider a hypothetical family of four with an income at 200 percent of the federal poverty line (or about $48,000 in 2016). Under the Reid plan, that family would pay 6.5 percent of its household income, or $3,120, as a premium [in the new health insurance exchange]. Their employer would pay a fee of $750 to cover some of the cost. The rest of the premium — $10,230 in this example — would get paid by the federal government.

By contrast, a worker with the same total compensation from his employer but with job-based insurance would enjoy a tax advantage of about $4,300 from employer-paid premiums. That’s nearly $6,000 less in governmental support than the worker who is eligible for direct subsidization in the exchange.

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Bruce says:

    So what will rational individuals do in the face of these disparities? They will manage to find jobs that pay higher salaries instead of providing health insurance.

  2. Tom H. says:

    Lots of good innuendos in these recent posts: Animal Farm, Peronista facism in Argetina. Good stuff! It’s certainly in the right spirit.

  3. Ken says:

    Agree with Bruce. This will cause a complete upheaval in the labor market.

  4. Catherine Gallagher says:

    Any bill that is passed without knowing what is in it,
    is or should be illegal. Our congressmen should know better. They are not passing the bill for the citizens. but for the lobbists and their benefits. A terrible way to run our country. A lot of prayers are needed.