State-by-State Effects of a Ruling for the Challengers in King v. Burwell
The Supreme Court ruled on June 25, 2015 in the King v. Burwell case to uphold health law subsidies. The case challenged the legality of health insurance subsidies provided to low- and middle-income people in the 34 states where the federal government is operating the insurance Marketplace under the Affordable Care Act. The map and table below show for each state: • The number of people receiving premium subsidies as of March 31, 2015, who would have lost them if the Court ruled for the challengers. • The total amount of federal subsidy dollars. • The average subsidy (or average premium tax credit) that subsidized enrollees have qualified for. • The average increase in premiums that subsidized enrollees would have faced if the subsidies had been disallowed. Estimates do not reflect the substantial premium increases that would likely have resulted in 2016 and beyond if subsidies were eliminated, triggering healthy enrollees to drop coverage and a deterioration in the insurance risk pool.
View Map By:
Sort Table by Columns:
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation estimates based on the latest enrollment data released by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Estimated are based on “effectuated” enrollment, which includes only enrollees who have paid their premiums. Premium increases use average premiums by state reported previously by HHS. Current premiums may differ somewhat from the earlier figures, though that is not likely since the tax credit amounts in the two reports are very similar for all states with the exception of Utah, Michigan and New Hampshire. These data are also available for viewing and downloading on State Health Facts.