Schmalts what you describe sounds similar to the little known and less understood Medicaid claw back for people 55+ at 129% of Federal Poverty Level or below who are required to enroll in Medicaid. Read this.
This, for me, is why I will always have health insurance. I have only been uninsured for 30 days in my entire life. That said, my family was doubled covered for 2012, but we dropped my wife's insurance at the end of the year as we are now in a place we can fully pay the annual deductible of mine in the event something really bad happens.
That is not how it was explained to me at all - but perhaps I just don't understand what you are saying. Basically the tax is levied on plans where the employers covers too much of the costs, thus shielding the employees from the true cost of healthcare. It is based on how much the value of the benefit the employer provides (if over "X" amount of dollars), not on the cost of the actual plan. Obviously if the employer only pays for a real cheap plan they wouldn't be subject to the tax. Also, if the employer offers an expensive plan but only covers "X" amount for it (passing the rest onto the employee) he will not be subject to the tax.
Yeah, and as you presented it is out of context, although I guess I don't care that much. My description pretty much is backed up by the article, which everyone should take a look at.
