Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,846 posts)
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:23 AM Nov 2013

Please help me with an ACA question.

I got an angry call from my parents today (both democrats, marginally). My dads job stopped offering spousal health coverage about 5 years ago and instead opted to start paying an extra 200 dollars a month that the employee (my dad) could use or that the employee could use to shop for insurance for his family. Today my father learned from HR that the company will still provide that extra 200 dollars a month but it can no longer be used for anything other than care for the employee, it can't be used to pay for spousal health insurance. The letter very clearly (and snottily) blames this on "Obamacare". How are they getting away with this bullshit? And what could their reasoning be? 200 dollars extra a month for health insurance doesn't seem like a lot, but my parents aren't exactly rich.

22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Please help me with an ACA question. (Original Post) ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 OP
One shortcoming of Obamacare.... ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #1
And insurance companies, too, which, if you think about it... Fridays Child Nov 2013 #11
Prices were going up monthly, yearly, before Obama was president. They'd have cut payments anyway. NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #2
We're not talking prices. ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #3
You don't think that cutting spousal support is the same as raising premiums? NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #4
They cut it 5 years ago. ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #8
so if there has been a pattern for 15 years Skittles Nov 2013 #12
They didn't cut it!!!!!!!!!!!! ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #15
OK so it is only PERCEIVED as a cut Skittles Nov 2013 #16
Foreseeable, sure. But ACA would have failed if it tried to prevent companies from continuing cuts. NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #17
there's nothing clever here Skittles Nov 2013 #20
If they buy private insurance not provided by employer, who are the employer JaneyVee Nov 2013 #5
I don't understand your fact situation. DURHAM D Nov 2013 #6
I think it's an HSA. ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #9
Can you find out for sure whether the employer contributions are part of an HSA, HRA or an FSA? PoliticAverse Nov 2013 #22
I don't think it has anything to do with Obamacare. Lex Nov 2013 #7
it appears to be a real gap in the law Enrique Nov 2013 #10
Its none of the company's business how employees spend their money, elleng Nov 2013 #13
Another theory I have.... ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #14
They are using the ACA as an opportunity to take some of that $200 back for themselves. Incitatus Nov 2013 #18
I imagine there are tax implications goldent Nov 2013 #19
Fine, if they ask, tell them you used another $200 you had lying around. Hoyt Nov 2013 #21

Fridays Child

(23,998 posts)
11. And insurance companies, too, which, if you think about it...
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:42 AM
Nov 2013

...makes no sense, at all. The ACA should have been named "HICWA" for the "Healthcare Insurance Company Welfare Act."

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
2. Prices were going up monthly, yearly, before Obama was president. They'd have cut payments anyway.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:25 AM
Nov 2013

That's the simple truth.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
4. You don't think that cutting spousal support is the same as raising premiums?
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:31 AM
Nov 2013

Look, I've seen nothing but rises in premiums AND cuts to spouses over 15 years.

Both are cuts to the coverage that a dollar buys.

What is happening you the plan you describe could have happened without ACA being in play.

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,846 posts)
8. They cut it 5 years ago.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:34 AM
Nov 2013

Again please re-read what I wrote.


They're still giving him that 200 dollars a month but they told him it cannot be used to buy health insurance for his wife (my mom). What difference does it matter what he does with that money? It doesn't add up unless they're just trying to prevent them from shopping in the exchanges.

Skittles

(152,967 posts)
12. so if there has been a pattern for 15 years
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:45 AM
Nov 2013

it should have been a given they would use ACA to cut even more

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,846 posts)
15. They didn't cut it!!!!!!!!!!!!
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:49 AM
Nov 2013

They're dictating how certain money can be spent. That's the complaint! I don't want canned responses about health insurance prices, I know them all. This is a different issue.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
17. Foreseeable, sure. But ACA would have failed if it tried to prevent companies from continuing cuts.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:55 AM
Nov 2013

So what it was able to do as the alternative was to say, "OK, go ahead with your bullshit practices, but you're going to have some competition come 2014."

As a compromise from the ideal, it's really pretty clever: You can't just go tell companies to freeze rates, not in this political climate, not in our current system, not with this Congress.

So what we have instead is competition, new markets that must abide by the guidelines re preexisting conditions and affordability.

The old plans and old rules and companies month to month shit policies? Go for it, assholes.

But see if you can compete with better cheaper fairer plans that meet ACA requirements.

We could have seen this coming and probably did, but what could we have done about it?

DURHAM D

(32,596 posts)
6. I don't understand your fact situation.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:32 AM
Nov 2013

Your father has medical insurance through his employer but yet his employer still provides an additional $200 a month for him to buy more insurance coverage for himself? Is that $2,400 reported as income?

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,846 posts)
9. I think it's an HSA.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:38 AM
Nov 2013

I have the paper in front of me now.

It says:


"The company is still going to give us $200 per month for medicine, co-pays, deductibles, dental, and vision. You will not be able to use the company's 200 per month towards the health insurance premiums of your spouse child."

They were using that 200 dollars to pay for the majority of my mothers monthly healthcare premium.

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
22. Can you find out for sure whether the employer contributions are part of an HSA, HRA or an FSA?
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 02:43 AM
Nov 2013

And if so, which, and if not what other basis it is being provided?

Lex

(34,108 posts)
7. I don't think it has anything to do with Obamacare.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:34 AM
Nov 2013

At all. What part of the ACA does the employer cite? None, I bet.

elleng

(130,156 posts)
13. Its none of the company's business how employees spend their money,
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:45 AM
Nov 2013

sounds like Koch-sponsored b.s. attempt at 'blackmail' to me.

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,846 posts)
14. Another theory I have....
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 12:48 AM
Nov 2013

Is that the insurance company made them put it in there to prevent the employee from taking that money to the exchanges and maybe going with a competing company.

Incitatus

(5,317 posts)
18. They are using the ACA as an opportunity to take some of that $200 back for themselves.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:03 AM
Nov 2013

It has nothing to do with the law. Most employees won't spend $2,400 a month towards their medical care and the remainder goes back to the company.

goldent

(1,582 posts)
19. I imagine there are tax implications
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 01:05 AM
Nov 2013

as to whether this can be treated as taxable income or not. The law is very complicated in this area, with new rules every year. If this money is pre-tax, there are restrictions on how it can be spent. I don't know what effect ACA would have on this, but it would not be surprising if it changed some things.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
21. Fine, if they ask, tell them you used another $200 you had lying around.
Tue Nov 19, 2013, 02:40 AM
Nov 2013

I think the employer, or some staff person, is a right wing, Limbaugh loving ahole. I don't think ACA prohibits that and there is no way anyone could tell. Sad thing is, some fool may forgo acquiring insurance for spouse.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Please help me with an AC...