The “Affordable” Care Act

It turns out that it doesn’t have to be affordable for spouses and kids.

In a long-awaited interpretation of the new health care law, the Obama administration said Monday that employers must offer health insurance to employees and their children, but will not be subject to any penalties if family coverage is unaffordable to workers.

The requirement for employers to provide health benefits to employees is a cornerstone of the new law, but the new rules proposed by the Internal Revenue Service said that employers’ obligation was to provide affordable insurance to cover their full-time employees. The rules offer no guarantee of affordable insurance for a worker’s children or spouse. To avoid a possible tax penalty, the government said, employers with 50 or more full-time employees must offer affordable coverage to those employees. But, it said, the meaning of “affordable” depends entirely on the cost of individual coverage for the employee, what the worker would pay for “self-only coverage.”

Hmmmm… Can anyone think of a way in which businesses can recover the loss of providing Obamcare mandated services to employees? It’s a real head scratcher, huh?

I just love watching the planners’ plans result in the unplanned.

Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The “Affordable” Care Act

  1. notamobster says:

    The majority of the 23 million uninsured in this country are the unemployed. The whole worthless boondoggle served no other purpose than to open the door to single-payer healthcare.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *