So, nope."If you offer an employee minimum essential coverage that provides minimum value and is affordable, you need not provide an opt out," says Seth Perretta, a partner at Groom Law Group, a Washington, D.C., firm specializing in employee benefits.
If a plan doesn't meet those standards, however, employees must be given the opportunity to decline those company plans, under the health law. They can shop for coverage on the health insurance marketplaces and may qualify for premium tax credits if their income is between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty level.
Those premium subsidies aren't available to workers whose employer offers good coverage that meets the law's standards.
Not that many employers are expected to strong arm their workers into buying health insurance. Those that do may be confused about their responsibilities under the health law, mistakenly believing that in order to avoid penalties they have to enroll their workers in coverage.
"That is just dead wrong," says Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University who's an expert on the health law.
"Nothing in the Affordable Care Act directs employers to make their coverage mandatory for employees," says a Treasury Department spokesperson. The law requires large employers "to either offer coverage or pay a fee if their full-time workers access tax credits to get coverage on their own in the marketplace."
Man, are you actually trying to fail? You literally quoted a section that proved his point.So, nope.
More Agenda21 agents are comin' to take your guns boogie-boogie.
Odd, I've never held a job where I didn't have the option to take or not take the employer insurance. Was that a union requirement?I worked for nearly 40 years, mostly in construction. In all that time, the ONLY choices I had when the company/union had health insurance was "PPO or Kaiser Permanente HMO." There was no other option of any kind. I suppose I COULD have just refused their insurance (generally provided to me at no cost for myself, and (at the time) a fairly modest fee for my family) but that would have been stupid.
You can still get insurance if you forgo what your employer offers, you just can't get it from the exchange and qualify for a subsidy. Which is... outrageous? That's exactly how it was before [angry face]Obamacare[/angry face].
When we elect politicians hell bent on breaking government, we get broken government. The system is working.The government created the problem. What's more - the government increased that problem, by making health insurance a state-limited employer provided benefit, rather than a free market product.
Let's say you have a family of four with both parents working at employers who offer subsidized health insurance as a benefit. That's a pretty common scenario I think.
In post-Obamacare world, now that same family may need to not only buy the family plan, but be forced by the employer of the second parent to purchase (completely redundant) single-person coverage that meets the standard of "minimum essential coverage that provides minimum value and is affordable."
Or worse, both could be required to buy their own single coverage policies and they'd still need to buy separate insurance for their kids
BTW you won't be able to use the exchange or get any subsidies.
Any Progressive I've ever heard wanted a Single Payer system.
Let's say you have a family of four with both parents working at employers who offer subsidized health insurance as a benefit. That's a pretty common scenario I think. To ensure everyone including children, they would likely want to do this by one parent choosing to elect for a family plan through their employer and the other parent opting out of theirs. In post-Obamacare world, now that same family may need to not only buy the family plan, but be forced by the employer of the second parent to purchase (completely redundant) single-person coverage that meets the standard of "minimum essential coverage that provides minimum value and is affordable." Or worse, both could be required to buy their own single coverage policies and they'd still need to buy separate insurance for their kids, and BTW you won't be able to use the exchange or get any subsidies.
Just another example of how Obamacare, a monumentally badly written and conceived law, fucks over the very people the politicians who wrote it claim to want to help. "Great news low income person, you're being required to buy a second insurance policy you don't need, but some wealthy person in another state no longer has to pay more than a 3/1 ratio for coverage over what you'll pay for your kids (out of pocket)."
Man, are you actually trying to fail? You literally quoted a section that proved his point.
"If you offer an employee minimum essential coverage that provides minimum value and is affordable, you need not provide an opt out," says Seth Perretta, a partner at Groom Law Group, a Washington, D.C., firm specializing in employee benefits.
Odd, I've never held a job where I didn't have the option to take or not take the employer insurance. Was that a union requirement?
Roughly half our office now did not have our health insurance before Obamacare, since their spouses had much better government insurance. Now we're at about three-quarters, since one side effect of the ACA is insurers not carrying spouses if the spouse has access to employer-provided health insurance.
So you want to take away employer choice? Right now the law lets the employer choose to make it mandatory (assuming it is affordable and adequate coverage). But you want to take that choice away from businesses? Why are you anti-business?Man, are you actually trying to fail? You literally quoted a section that proved his point.
Premium is capped at 9.5% of federal poverty level, which is about $90 per month.That means the employee contribution is no more than 9.5 percent of the federal poverty guideline and the plan pays for at least 60 percent of covered medical expenses, on average.
I believe nearly everybody wants a Single Payer system. It can't happen fast enough.
snip ...
Roughly half our office now did not have our health insurance before Obamacare, since their spouses had much better government insurance. Now we're at about three-quarters, since one side effect of the ACA is insurers not carrying spouses if the spouse has access to employer-provided health insurance.