premiums may rise by 75% or more.
KFF’s newly updated tax credit calculator allows Marketplace enrollees to compare how their out-of-pocket premium payments could differ if lawmakers extend the ACA’s enhanced premium tax credits or allow them to expire this year. To demonstrate the range of effects, KFF examines in a separate data note what the loss of the enhanced tax credits would mean for different households.
A KFF Health News story looks at how Trump administration officials, looking at the possible impact of large insurance premium increases for millions of people, want more consumers to consider plans with less generous benefits and high deductibles.
Question of the Week (KFF)
Last week, 49% correctly answered that if the enhanced premium tax credits expire at the end of 2025, out-of-pocket premiums would rise by over 75% on average for the individuals and families buying coverage through the Marketplace.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
Most developed nations have a single payer health care system, that delivers better health at a lower cost per patient. Shifting the burden of health care premiums from businesses to a single payer system also makes them (businesses) more competitive internationally.
LikeLike
Makes you wonder doesn’t it?DickRichard D QuinnBlogging
LikeLiked by 1 person
Amazing!
Kaiser and others fail to mention that these “super subsidies” were never part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA for short).
They were add ons by the Biden Administration. They were intended to buy votes. They were intended to be temporary. They were intended to reduce costs and expand subsidies as part of the response to COVID.
COVID has long been over – pretty much since 2021, once the vaccines were commonplace. These enhanced subsidies were never part of Health Reform and THEY NEVER SHOULD HAVE BECOME LAW AS WE HAD ALREADY BLOWN THROUGH A FEW TRILLIONS IN COVID EXPENDITURES.
What the expiration of the subsidies confirms, however, is that ACA was NEVER about reducing the cost of health coverage for those who are covered by plans where the government does not set prices (employer-sponsored plans, marketplace/exchange coverage, individual insurance, etc.) No, the ACA was solely focused on increasing the number of people who were covered under Medicaid and taxpayer-subsidized coverage, even moving millions from what would have been employer-sponsored coverage to taxpayer financed coverage, while reducing the number of uninsured.
It was and it remains intentional – a drift towards single payer where taxpayers fund an ever increasing amount of health coverage for an ever increasing number of individuals.
ACA is the primary reason why America added $26 Trillion to the national debt over the past 15 years since March 23, 2010, the date PPACA became law with President Obama’s signature.
That is, we’ve reduced the cost of coverage today and sent the bill to generations too young to vote and those yet unborn.
Health Reform and to a much lesser level, President George W. Bush’s creation of Medicare Part D (Rx) coverage are the two main reasons why we are consistently running $1 – $2 Trillion in annual deficits – because, while President Obama guaranteed that health reform would not add one thin dime to the deficits and debts, all of the revenue gamesmanship failed.
Long past time to stop the farce. Long past time to stop adding to the massive burden we are passing to future generations.
Let the enhanced, vote buying subsidies lapse as approved when it was signed into law by Congress and President Biden.
LikeLike
Al Lindquist
Great material Jack–per usual–another Quinn project that costs far more than projected–Quinn keeps drinking the big government Kool aid that we are all better off because of these boondoggles–these guys fall for it all from the border is closed”, to it will only cost $2,500 and you can keep your doctor.
LikeLike