4 ms·
That's why many proposals that scrap employer provided health insurance, give the same benefit to employers via HSAs (a pre-tax health savings account ). In ef
by UnoriginalGuy 9y ago
That's why many proposals that scrap employer provided health insurance, give the same benefit to employers via HSAs (a pre-tax health savings account ).
In effect, instead of the employer picking the employee's health insurance the employee could go to the open market, but both the employer and employee get the same tax benefits via putting money pre-tax into a HSA which can then be used to pay for health insurance.
It would require massively increasing the maximum contributions on HSAs (currently only $6,750 for a family), since HSAs weren't originally designed to pay for your health insurance, just healthcare costs. But conceptually it is the easiest way to allow consumer choice in the health insurance market.
- tvmalsv 9y ago> putting money pre-tax into a HSA which can then be used to pay for health insurance. Surprisingly (it was to me, anyway), health insurance premiums don't qualify as a medical expense, so any funds withdrawn from an HSA for insurance premiums will be subject to taxes and penalties.
- UnoriginalGuy 9y agoYou're describing how HSAs currently work. The discussion is healthcare reform, so limitations like that would go the way of the low maximum contributions if HSAs were redesigned to be used to pay for insurance.