user72685

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by user72685 8y ago

   The employer picking up 100% of the premiums (which, in a self-funded plan like this, are paid into the plan trust) just makes this kind of stuff even more likely. If an employee or employee's covered spouse or dependent has health iss
2. 2.▲
   by user72685 8y ago

   Also worth noting that self-funded plans will have their premiums set based on the plan's actual claims experience, which means employers with a sicker risk pool will pay more. This also encourages discrimination against older or unhea
3. 3.▲
   by user72685 8y ago

   > sure, but the employer doesn't pay any tax on this type of benefit, whereas we would both face additional taxes if they simply paid me more. That argument seems like the equivalent of wasting money just for a tax deduction. You ar
4. 4.▲
   by user72685 8y ago

   Ask your Representative and Senators to sign on to HR 676 ( https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/676 ) and S 1804 ( https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senat
5. 5.▲
   by user72685 8y ago

   How much does that plan actually cost? Your W-2 should include the value of the employer's subsidy. You're still paying for inflated healthcare costs either way; in a competitive labor market (not always the case but certainly is
6. 6.▲
   by user72685 8y ago

   > I do love "sensible policy changes" that work by extracting money from physicians to cover patient bills rather than actually fixing the systemic dysfunction. The article says insurers are required to pay: > The doctors wo