The Alliance for Health Reform and The Commonwealth Fund co-sponsored this briefing to explore the health reform proposals being considered which may impose responsibilities on both individuals and employers to have and help pay for coverage and whether they will be able to pay the amounts above the subsidies. Questions…
- view as grid
- view as list
As fall approaches, we can expect to hear more about how employers are adapting their health plans for 2016 open enrollments. One topic likely to garner a good deal of attention is how the Affordable Care Act’s high cost plan tax (HCPT), sometimes called the “Cadillac plan” tax or “Cadillac tax,” is affecting employer decisions about their health benefits. The tax takes effect in 2018.
The potential of facing an HCPT assessment as soon as 2018 is encouraging employers to assess their current health benefits and consider cost reductions to avoid triggering the tax. Some employers announced that they made changes in 2014 in anticipation of the HCPT, and more are likely to do so as the implementation date gets closer.
Analysis Estimates 1 in 4 Employers Offering Health Benefits Could Be Affected by the ‘Cadillac Tax’ in 2018 if Current Trends Continue
Share of Potentially-Affected Employers Could Grow to 30% in 2023, 42% in 2028, Analysis Finds New projections from the Kaiser Family Foundation estimate that one in four employers (26%) offering health benefits could be subject to the Affordable Care Act’s tax on high-cost health plans, also known as the “Cadillac…
Employer Family Health Premiums Rise 4 Percent to $17,545 in 2015, Extending a Decade-Long Trend of Relatively Moderate Increases
Since 2010, Deductibles for All Workers Have Risen Almost Three Times as Fast as Premiums and About Seven Times as Fast as Wages and Inflation Facing New Requirements, Few Employers Make Changes to Workers’ Hours Menlo Park, Calif. – Single and family premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance rose an average of…
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires most private health insurance plans to provide coverage for a broad range of preventive services, including most contraceptives for women. This policy was at the center of a Supreme Court case brought forward by for-profit corporations (Hobby Lobby and Conestoga) that successfully claimed that the contraceptive coverage requirement violated their religious rights. Last month, the Supreme Court agreed to hear yet another challenge (Zubik v Burwell) to the contraceptive coverage requirement, this time brought by nonprofit corporations, claiming that the accommodation established by the federal government for religiously affiliated nonprofit employers with objections to contraception violates their religious rights.
A Comparison of the Availability and Cost of Coverage for Workers in Small Firms and Large Firms: Update from the 2015 Employer Health Benefits Survey
Small and large firms vary substantially on health insurance offer rates and costs. This brief expands on information presented in the 2015 Kaiser/HRET Survey of Employer-Sponsored Health Benefits to look exclusively at differences in offer rates, plan costs, and cost sharing between small firms and large firms.
In this post on The Huffington Post, Alina Salganicoff and Laurie Sobel offer a Q&A on “contraceptive-only” plans, an approach mentioned during oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court case Zubik v. Burwell. In the Zubik case, a group of religiously affiliated nonprofits with religious objections to providing birth control coverage seek an exemption from the Affordable Care Act’s provision requiring most plans to offer such coverage without cost-sharing.
This Visualizing Health Policy infographic looks at eligibility and coverage trends in employer-sponsored health insurance. Between 2000 and 2015, the share of workers covered by health benefits offered by their employers dropped from 63 percent to 56 percent, with some firms not offering coverage and some employees not enrolling when…
This brief describes the different forms of tax assistance for private health insurance, including subsidies offered through the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces and benefits for people who are self-employed or who have employer-based coverage. The brief also provides examples of how the subsidies work and how the amounts may differ by income and type of coverage.