Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Heritage Foundation Opposes Insurance Premium Tax

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 07:37 PM
Original message
Heritage Foundation Opposes Insurance Premium Tax
Recognize any of your arguments against this tax? Surprised that you're agreeing with Heritage, of all groups?

One thing though, at least this clarifies who the tax is on. Insurance companies.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCAre/bg2350.cfm


Among the various new taxes in the Senate health care legislation is one disguised as a $6.7 billion a year "fee" imposed on health insurers.<1> In reality, this "fee" is structured as an insurance premium tax that will be passed directly on to consumers. If enacted, it would add an average of 1.5 percent to the cost of health insurance policies currently purchased by over 165 million Americans, starting in 2010.

While it is true that the cost to individuals and families of this new premium tax would be less than that of some other tax increases in the Senate bill, it is significant for more than just its cost. More important, this provision of the Senate bill encapsulates in microcosm virtually all of the larger, fundamental problems with the Obama-Reid-Pelosi approach to so-called health reform--problems that are endemic to both the House and Senate bills. Specifically:

It increases health costs. This so-called fee on insurance companies would be passed on to consumers, directly increasing the cost of health insurance for tens of millions of Americans and contravening Congress's stated intention that its legislation will reduce health insurance costs.

It increases taxes. Because this "fee" is effectively an insurance premium tax imposed on policies purchased by half of all Americans, it violates President Barack Obama's repeated promise that most Americans, or at least those with incomes below $250,000, would not see their taxes increased in any way, shape, or form.

It creates new inequities. Because it would apply to policies purchased from insurers but not to employer self-insured health plans, this insurance premium tax would create new inequities by disadvantaging one source of health insurance coverage relative to another source of coverage, thus creating winners and losers based on where people happen to work.

It is disingenuous. Labeling these provisions a "fee" imposed on insurance companies is designed to give the impression that it affects only a politically disfavored interest group. In reality, however, since the legislation specifies that it will be apportioned based on each insurer's premium revenues, it would function exactly like a direct insurance premium tax paid by consumers.

It creates perverse incentives. This tax would apply to those who have purchased health insurance, with the proceeds funding subsidies for those who have not purchased such coverage.

It distorts markets. The tax would apply to both an insurance company's premium revenue and its revenue from providing "administrative services" (such as claims processing) to employer and union self-insured plans. However, a vendor that provides self-insured plans with administrative services but does not sell health insurance would not be subject to the tax. Thus, self-insured employers would have a financial incentive to prefer "third-party administrators" that are not insurance companies when contracting for administrative services for their plans.

It expands federal power. This insurance premium tax would create a new, permanent federal tax that could, and likely would, be increased by Congress in future years as the growth in new government spending in the legislation outstrips the growth of revenues to fund that spending.

How the New Premium Tax Works

The Senate bill's new premium tax is separate from, and in addition to, another new excise tax that would be imposed on "high-cost" health plans. The excise tax on high-cost plans is larger, has received more attention, and would apply to all private insurance plans, both those sold by insurers and employer-sponsored self-insured plans.

In contrast, the premium tax takes the form of a $6.7 billion per year "fee" imposed on both for-profit and not-for-profit commercial insurers, but not on employer-sponsored self-insured plans, and would apply to all commercial health insurance policies, not just those that are high-cost. While the provision is described as a fee, it is designed to function like an insurance premium tax and would work as follows:

Each year, the U.S. Treasury would calculate the total amount of premiums received in the previous year by all private insurers in the U.S. for the health insurance policies they sold, as well as the insurers' revenues from providing administrative services to employer and union self-insured plans.

The Treasury would then charge each insurer a portion of the $6.7 billion tax based on each insurer's share of total premiums plus revenues from providing administrative services.

In calculating the tax, the legislation instructs the Treasury to double the amount of insurer income from providing administrative services before adding it to the premium income and then to apportion the tax based on each insurer's share of the combined, total amount.

Within the broad category of "health insurance" there are different "lines" of business, such as individual policies; employer group policies; limited-benefit policies for dental care, vision care, and pharmaceutical benefits (such as the private plans that provide Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage); and reinsurance and stop-loss coverage sold to employer and union self-insured plans. Some insurers specialize in just one or two lines of coverage, while others offer a broad range of products. Given that the new tax would be assessed based on each insurer's market share of total health insurance premiums and the legislative specifics of how it would be applied, it is possible to predict a number of effects.

First, the legislation specifies that employer self-insured plans and government health care programs are exempt but that all commercial health insurance lines are subject to the tax, including private plans purchased with government subsidies, so traditional Medicaid and Medicare coverage will not be taxed. However, Medicare Advantage plans, Medicare Prescription Drug plans, and any Medicaid HMO coverage for which a state contracts with an insurer on an "at-risk" basis will be subject to the tax. Also subject to the tax will be the private insurance plans purchased by federal workers through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP).

Second, it can be expected that insurers will not want to disadvantage some customers relative to other customers. Consequently, insurers offering more than one line of health insurance can be expected to pass on the cost of the tax proportionately to each line of business, according to the premium revenues they receive from each. For example, an insurer whose premium revenues come 75 percent from group policies and 25 percent from individual policies can be expected to pass on to its group policyholders 75 percent of what the insurer is assessed under the new tax while passing on the other 25 percent of the tax to its individual policyholders.

Third, it can be expected that the tax will also be passed on proportionately at the customer and enrollee level. Thus, individuals and groups that pay more for health insurance, either because they have policies with more benefits or because they have higher medical costs, will pay more of the tax. In the same fashion, individuals who, for example, buy more gasoline pay a larger share of total gas taxes than those who buy less gasoline.

How the Tax Will Affect Families and Businesses

Estimated Individual and Family Costs. The cost of this tax to individuals and families can be calculated from recent health insurance premium and enrollment data by product line. In 2008, all private insurers in the U.S. received a combined $446.5 billion in health insurance premiums. Thus, assessing a $6.7 billion annual fee on that current level of total premiums translates into an effective premium tax of 1.5 percent on every commercial health insurance policy.<2>

Premium and enrollment data are available for seven health insurance product lines: individual, group, FEHBP, Medicare Advantage, Medicaid Managed Care, Medicare Supplemental (Medigap), and limited-benefit plans. Thus, the per-capita amount of the tax can be further estimated for each type of health insurance coverage.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. Pat Buchanan opposed the war. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Maybe y'all are Republicans and don't know it n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I'm a bit confused by your response.
Are you saying you supported the war?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TransitJohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm assuming the sarcasm smiley is missing?
Edited on Sun Jan-10-10 08:38 PM by TransitJohn
You said,
Recognize any of your arguments against this tax? Surprised that you're agreeing with Heritage, of all groups?

One thing though, at least this clarifies who the tax is on. Insurance companies.


However, the very start of your posted article is,
Among the various new taxes in the Senate health care legislation is one disguised as a $6.7 billion a year "fee" imposed on health insurers.<1> In reality, this "fee" is structured as an insurance premium tax that will be passed directly on to consumers. If enacted, it would add an average of 1.5 percent to the cost of health insurance policies currently purchased by over 165 million Americans, starting in 2010.


Uh.....what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. That's what the right always says
Their argument against every tax is that it will be passed on to the consumer and raise prices. I'm not surprised at that.

I'm surprised at how many DUers are now convinced the right wing was right on taxes all along, at least to listen to them on this health premium tax you'd think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. Please tell us this is something you didn't expect
If the State of Texas started charging death row inmates for the needle they were going to use to execute them with, the Heritage Foundation would call it a tax and come out against it, even though they're pro-death penalty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. These are the same arguments DUers are using
That's what I didn't expect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
7. Looks like they exempted self insured plans. Good to know.
This may compel unions and large companies to go self insured and take themselves out of the markets. Very interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Not sure I like that
Big corporations will still get a tax deduction for putting money into health care "premiums" instead of workers' pockets. Doesn't seem like such a good idea and unions haven't stopped fighting the tax anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
8. more framing. Now if you're against this you're with the Heritage Foundation. Message discipline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Question your arguments, that's all
When you sound like the Heritage Foundation, you might want to rethink what you're saying.

And for the record, I'm not for or against the health premium tax. I just can't stand hypocrites and 80% of the argument against this health care bill are the reverse of arguments the exact same people made in the past. It's so bad, people are using Republican anti-tax arguments. Now that's some crazy shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. "I'm not for or against the health premium tax." Why not?

If it's too confusing to understand I'm sure DU'ers can help you.

Just don't be too proud to ask for help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Both choices have pros & cons
The House tax is just a tax, subject to future increases and decreases, not very stable. There is also absolutely no possibility for it to contribute to reduction of runaway premiums.

The Senate tax forces companies to take a hard look at premiums and ask whether they're really worth what they're paying. That's worth considering.

Either way, fine by me.

No, I don't need any help, but you knew that, ja.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TransitJohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Hmmm.
When you sound like the Heritage Foundation, you might want to rethink what you're saying.

And for the record, I'm not for or against the health premium tax. I just can't stand hypocrites and 80% of the argument for this health care bill are the reverse of arguments the exact same people made in the past. It's so bad, people are using Republican anti-worker arguments. Now that's some crazy shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. guilt by association. Message Discipline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
15. Adolph Hitler was often photographed with his
dog Blondi, and the Nazi party used the photos as propaganda to show that they supported animal welfare.

Leonid Brezhnev sent Soviet troops into Afghanistan to protect the elected Afghan government from the mujahideen and Taliban forces "who destroyed much of the infrastructure established during the fourteen years of communist rule. Under the DRA, the Afghan economy, health care system, educational system and law enforcement system, among other elements, entered a peak." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan President Obama wants to help the elected (?) Afghan government against the Taliban.

See how this works? If you say that two people (or groups) who agree on something are the same, you can make all sort of stuff up...and no, I am not saying that our president is just like Hitler or Brezhnev, because I do recognize that agreeing on one thing does not make people the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-10-10 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
16. Good evening, Senator McCarthy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC