Politico is reporting the Nancy Pelosi’s “fix” to the excise tax is to just raise the limit.
Pelosi has repeatedly expressed her frustrations about the inclusion of the Cadillac tax in the Senate bill and has sparred with Obama about the issue during face-to-face meetings. Her hope now, House aides say, is to get the administration to accept a tax that starts on family plans worth $28,000 — $7,000 more than the threshold favored by Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
This is the wrong way to fix the excise tax. The problem is not that the current level of $23,000 is too low (very few plans are currently above this limit), the issue is that the tax is unfocused, poorly designed, and badly indexed.
The first issue is that the tax is designed like a blunt instrument, it hits all plans over a set limit, regardless of how generous or stingy the benefits are. Some companies, with much older work forces and unusually high levels of medical problems, could have very expensive premiums even for fairly bare bones plans. These are not the people you want hit by the tax. This problem can be solved with some form of community adjustment calculation. The excise tax should be based on how much the premiums would be, given the level of benefits if sold to a risk pool with a regional average for health and age.
Another issue is that the level of the tax is set at a flat 40% for all benefits over $23,000. The tax should be set to any employee’s current average tax rate, not 40%. This 40% level is over many American’s current average tax rate. This means even if an employer or employee are willing to pay more for better health insurance, and are willing to pay taxes on these additional benefits as if they are income, it would still not make financial sense to do so. I see no logical reason to put in place obstacles preventing people from getting super-high-end health insurance if they want and are willing to treat the additional benefits as taxable income and/or pay for them with post-tax dollars.
The biggest issue is that the tax is badly indexed. It is fixed to the consumer price index plus 1%. The problem is not how many plans the excise tax will hit at first, but how many plans it will eventually hit moving forward. Health insurance premiums are rising much faster than general inflation, and nothing in this health care bill leads me to expect that will change. Even in other countries with sensible health care systems, costs are still increasing at a rate faster than inflation. At first, the excise tax will hit only a small number of plans, but, moving forward, it will start to affect more and more middle class Americans, forcing their health insurance plans to get worse. Simply raising the limit does not solve the problem, it only delays for a few years when the tax will start hitting middle class families.
The solution is to make sure this “Cadillac” tax remains forever only a tax on truly “Cadillac” plans. That can be done by indexing the tax to health care prices. My prefered solution is to index the tax to the average premiums in the federal employee health benefit (FEHB) program plus some large percentage. The government is the largest provider of employer health care in the country. If it can bring down premiums and slow the growth rate of its health care costs, the rest of the private sector should be able to follow suit. Conversely, if the FEHB as the largest single purchaser of insurance can’t slow the growth rate of its health care premiums, much smaller private companies should not be expected to either.
If Pelosi really wants to fix the excise tax, simply raising the limit should not be the solution. Her goal should be to make sure the tax is better designed and properly indexed.




10 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Hopefully, someone is pushing your thoughts/ideas into the ObamaRahma,Pelosi,Reid,Durbin,Hoyer conferences. But I’m not one for hoping.
One of the defenses, such as it is, that I’ve heard for the excise tax as it was written is that it would “bend the curve” of spending on insurance. That is, the excise tax is not supposed to generate money but cap the maximum that at business can pay out without being penalized. The goal, if this is true, being to cut overall spending on insurance. The fact that everyone covered gets a progressively lower cap being a feature not a defect.
There is the old saw about the penny pinching farmer who always complained that his mule ate too much. One day one of his neighbors saw him walking into town and asked him how his plan to train his mule to live on less had been working out. The farmer said that he had almost gotten the animal trained to live on nothing but then it just up and died. Some stories just keep getting retold.
If they use an indexed cap then the bend the curve idea explanation was probably not correct.
This will be like the Alternative Minimum Tax. On steroids.
I have said this about a dozen times on this site and I don’t get any response. If these jerks really wanted to fix health care in this country they would have formed a bill under reconciliation that allowed anyone at any age to sign up for medicare.
It would completely eliminate the need for so-called ‘insurance reform’ because anyone that get’s shafted by their insurance company or costed out of the market could simply roll down the road to the nearest enrollment center and sign up for medicare.
How long before these corporate kingpins lose all their customers? Still want private insurance and medicare? Sure, it’s currently done. That wouldn’t have to change either!
So it is quite apparent this whole HCR plan is another false flag operation to transfer massive amounts of Chinese money to the ‘masters of the universe’ until the Fed has to monetize the crippling national debt which will instantly bankrupt everyone (that is the insiders will know exactly when to do it) who hasn’t quietly exchanged their dollars for reminbi or gold or something safe before the calamity hits and we lose reserve currency status.
It is an almost elegant plan to enslave a nation and steal our 3 trillion dollar surplus in Social Security. Don’t believe me? Look what happen to Iceland. Their economy was small enough all it took was the banking sector to sink them though. With a 14 trillion dollar econmony its obviously a lot harder to find a way to carry off all that loot in as few hands as possible.
Isn’t the whole point of this excise tax to undermine the unions by striking down their greatest achievements for members–namely, good benefits? i know the unions see it that way. But I’ve read that Rahm Emanuel has promised to back them on EFCA if they roll on their members where the excise tax is concerned. is that true, Jon?
I’m not sure what a proper response might look like. Nearly no one putting stuff up on FDL supports the current set of proposals. Jon Walker has done a very good job of suggesting, to this limited audience possible fixes but he has openly said that the few things that he has seen as improvements so far are bits around the edges.
Some people favor a robust public option, whatever that might be, while some want some sort of single payer. For myself since either one looks like a fantasy I’ll take single payer.
On the unrelated issue of debt the number one purchaser of debt this year was not the Chinese, who actually reduced their holdings by a smidgen according to some reports. The number one purchaser was none-of-the-above. Households, which are not foreign banks, funds, US banks or any other usual purchasing group went from around (this is from memory) $15 billion last year to $500 billion this year.
For what it’s worth, lots of people are concerned about the idea that we can spend our way to prosperity. What little I know about economics (and that is little indeed) tells me this is not how Keynes described his proposed solutions. Not by a mile. Unfortunately that problem is much bigger than single payer and we’re not on track to get that either.
not exactly tit for tat but I have heard Rahm has trick the unions into being quiet about everything because of a promise about a weak EFCA if they all behave.
If they believe Rahm, I’ve some swampland I’d like to sell them.
As you mentioned “its the indexing stupid” !!!
Eventually all workers will be affected by this tax, its simple math.
What happens when everyone who thought this tax was only going to affect Goldman Sachs VPs starts realizes it will affect them.
As someone said it will be just like the AMT, the politicians will never let it affect the majority of the middle class and then it will never raise the revenues promised.
Progressives have lost every other single public policy point on this thing. We can stop yapping about the public option. We can forget about the right to choose. Those craven bastards have thrown them over the side.
The excise tax is so bad it’s one of those things I can’t believe they are serious about. It does not lower costs. It does not increase coverage. It does not help a single person in America. Not one. The only purpose it has is to push down benefit levels. We are in a pincer: people without insurance will be raised up to get some form, maybe, and people with good insurance will be shoved down to meet them at the mediocre level at best.
This bill is not about getting a single person health care. It is about giving every single person shitty health insurance. Congress may be made of fools, but on this one, they are being knaves.