Posted by Vince/KS on 6/13/08 12:06pm
Msg #251182
Annual Employee Benefits Seminar - Attended June 2008
Presented was a great deal of information, some that may be interesting to the regular readers of this forum. So, I’ll do a brief summary, and if encouraged, I’ll provide some additional information on the various items presented.
Within the next decade, the funding of health care will shift from the majority being funded by private companies to the majority being funded by public programs. This is mostly due to the amount of children enrolling in chips programs and the huge amount of baby boomers that will be relying on Medicare. These are the two major programs that are leading this shift. In addition, more states are likely to join Massachusetts, Maine and Vermont in adopting some kind of state-wide mandated health care system (a long list was presented of those states that introduced legislation last year). But, public entities are getting very concerned, because these programs are costing vastly more than the projections made in the states that have implemented them. Perhaps this is sort of like the marketing person that makes big promises during the presentation and then the staff person says, "how the hell are we going to do that" - to which the marketing person says "my job is to sell, it is the your job to keep the promise," so, staffs are getting really worried.
As a result of the problems in Public Healthcare Financing, these Public entities are seeking major assistance from Healthcare Networks (like preferred provider organizations and insurance companies and hmo’s) that have been established and functional. Besides the quality/value/cost reimbursement issues, much of the focus, so far, has been on ways to cut services needed by systematically identifying leading causes of preventable health problems. The three leading causes of preventable problems have been identified as 1. smoking, 2. improper diet and 3. lack of exercise. We know what the government is doing about smoking (is it allowed in your community places?). And yet the number of smokers and tobacco sales have remained constant to the disappointment and frustration of many. One speaker asked if public officials will be randomly pulling persons off the street for cholesterol screening. Some might ask if we will see favorite foods having excise taxes attached to them (a special tax on ice cream, fatty beef, bacon, burritos - etc?).
Rewarding doctors with higher "bonuses" for good positive outcomes and trying to decrease pay to doctors that do not perform as well (the speaker was a doctor and he said "doctors that suck shouldn’t be treated the same as good doctors" . He said the databases are coming into place where it becomes "transparent" who the better and worse doctors are even though the doctors have been typically saying they personally have worse patients than their peers and have fought the "transparent" measures being sought - but the public/private sector units have developed systems to identify them and measures are being slowly implemented so that they will be treated accordingly.
From the national perspective, it is likely that Congress will move substantially to the left. The number of Republicans that are retiring, not seeking reelection or are in trouble is huge this year. The list of Democrat seats is very short . The importance is obviously that the true power lies in having a veto proof (60 votes in senate) congress and that is expected to happen.
The short version of the stated healthcare position of the leading candidates was examined. Obama has supported a program similar to Massachusetts, but with opt-out "privilege". McCain wants to do away with tax deductions to corporations that sponsor healthcare programs. Instead he wants to allow a limited tax credit for individual taxpayers to buy into an available system. Those that could not afford it will be treated similarly to current methods. I personally wonder if what the president wants (regardless who it is) will matter if the congress is truly veto proof.
More plans that are subject to ERISA are being "wrapped" into a single package to avoid potential and substantial penalties linked to each particular document. More simply put, having six sets of ERISA documents may be six times as costly as one "wrap" plan.
Long Term Care coverage, being offered as an employer plan, has very significant tax advantages to the employee. However, it is a product that most persons avoid buying and has remained unpopular.
Lastly, but needs the full spear-heading of it’s primary sponsor, is a new entitlement program called "The Class Act of 2007". Senator Kennedy was pushing this program strongly as a "bi-partisan" plan to initially assist senior citizens needing long term care. Long Term Care in a facility typically currently runs from $3,000 to $7,000 per month and is not covered by Medicare, but is by Medicaid (for those that have assets exhausted). For one view on this, go to his site at http://kennedy.senate.gov/newsroom/press_release.cfm?id=ff644903-1844-4478-b53a-5cfb712a5850 .
|
Reply by Vince/KS on 6/13/08 6:04pm
Msg #251233
$2,500 single - $5,000 Family
Deduction off the top on your tax return under the McCain Plan. That may allow you to afford a plan if you are currently paying that much in federal taxes - depending upon availablity in your area at the time when and if this were to be implemented. You might ask yourself what your tax bracket is. If you are in a 10% federal bracket and are single with no other deductions, and earning $25,000 a year, how much would this plan cost you? It is a different approach to the way things are.
|
