zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 17, 2017 15:33:51 GMT -5
Just got the Blue Cross renewal notice. Our current monthly premium is $1,729.41. They picked the "comparable " plan, Blue Advantage Gold 2500. The monthly premium will be $3,273.12. Just under $40,000. for a year of premiums. Our business has 5 employees. We don't make enough to cover employee health insurance. With my part-time second job, we will gross just under $70,000. this year. Too much for Obamacare premiums. My husband is suggesting we roll the dice and drop the insurance. He needs cataract surgery. The new plan has an individual out-of-pocket max of $7,350 and a $2,500 deductible. The super-duper plan still won't cover the surgery anyway. The next lower plan is ~$2,660 per month. I have no idea what we are really going to do. Not surprised. I’m sorry because I know how awful it is. I’m sure I’ll get hit the same way which is why I’m praying there’s a majot medical plan that I can afford.
|
|
cktc
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 19, 2013 22:15:31 GMT -5
Posts: 3,202
|
Post by cktc on Oct 17, 2017 16:24:35 GMT -5
I've heard of people doing a legal separation to stay on an ex's insurance, never after the divorce though.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,470
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 17, 2017 16:40:05 GMT -5
I've heard of people doing a legal separation to stay on an ex's insurance, never after the divorce though. And I have been to court house weddings to get coverage. They are both divorced now.
|
|
alabamagal
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 11:30:29 GMT -5
Posts: 8,122
|
Post by alabamagal on Oct 17, 2017 17:24:02 GMT -5
I just got a text from ODS "Mom can you call me tonight about health insurance" so I guess it is his annual enrollment. I just got mine at work.
He will be turning 26 next July so will have to get insurance through his work. He is on mine now, and I will still need family coverage for YDS, so it does not cost anything extra to leave ODS on my plan. But he will have to start paying in August. It will probably be $100 a month for him.
|
|
siralynn
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 8, 2013 10:33:16 GMT -5
Posts: 528
|
Post by siralynn on Oct 17, 2017 17:46:40 GMT -5
I pay $46.63 for health insurance for me and my two kids, $11.69 for dental for me and two kids, and $3.15 for vision coverage just for me. Twice a month means $1475 annually. My husband's current contract at work completely covers his health and dental insurance premiums (he's on a very similar Kaiser Permanente plan with slightly different copays).
I don't remember what the annual cost was. Obviously our employers cover the vast majority of the cost.
Although health care doesn't personally cost me very much at all, I'm enough of a liberal snowflake to think that single payer is ultimately the right answer for the overall system.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 18:08:57 GMT -5
I just got a text from ODS "Mom can you call me tonight about health insurance" so I guess it is his annual enrollment. I just got mine at work. He will be turning 26 next July so will have to get insurance through his work. He is on mine now, and I will still need family coverage for YDS, so it does not cost anything extra to leave ODS on my plan. But he will have to start paying in August. It will probably be $100 a month for him. This was something I never understood about the ACA when they removed the Student requirement. Why did they write it that way. People that are working and are offered insurance through their employment still shouldn't be on their parents. I get that "kids" that are struggling and didn't go on to school still need to stay on their parents, but 4 extra years for many people working full time (think from age 22 to 26) is opposite of trying to get more people to pay into the insurance pool to lower total costs to everyone. He should check to make sure "aging" out is a valid event to allow signing up out of the open enrollment period. That $100/mo overlap is cheap for ~8-9 months versus having to find a temporary policy.
|
|
plugginaway22
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 10:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by plugginaway22 on Oct 17, 2017 18:46:01 GMT -5
Having our DS on the policy is a choice we make and we do pay extra for. He is technically 'in the pool'. Most employers don't just carry these adults for free.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Oct 17, 2017 20:07:10 GMT -5
I just got a text from ODS "Mom can you call me tonight about health insurance" so I guess it is his annual enrollment. I just got mine at work. He will be turning 26 next July so will have to get insurance through his work. He is on mine now, and I will still need family coverage for YDS, so it does not cost anything extra to leave ODS on my plan. But he will have to start paying in August. It will probably be $100 a month for him. This was something I never understood about the ACA when they removed the Student requirement. Why did they write it that way. People that are working and are offered insurance through their employment still shouldn't be on their parents. I get that "kids" that are struggling and didn't go on to school still need to stay on their parents, but 4 extra years for many people working full time (think from age 22 to 26) is opposite of trying to get more people to pay into the insurance pool to lower total costs to everyone. He should check to make sure "aging" out is a valid event to allow signing up out of the open enrollment period. That $100/mo overlap is cheap for ~8-9 months versus having to find a temporary policy. Because it is taking students a few more years to get a job where they get benefits. My nephew is turning 26 next month, and is a type 1 diabetic. Despite the fact that he has been working almost steadily since he graduated from college 2+ years ago, he has been on contract positions, where he gets no benefits. He just recently got his first job, with his own health insurance. He was really on pins for the last year. Going without insurance is not an optional him.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2017 21:31:27 GMT -5
This was something I never understood about the ACA when they removed the Student requirement. Why did they write it that way. People that are working and are offered insurance through their employment still shouldn't be on their parents. I get that "kids" that are struggling and didn't go on to school still need to stay on their parents, but 4 extra years for many people working full time (think from age 22 to 26) is opposite of trying to get more people to pay into the insurance pool to lower total costs to everyone. He should check to make sure "aging" out is a valid event to allow signing up out of the open enrollment period. That $100/mo overlap is cheap for ~8-9 months versus having to find a temporary policy. Because it is taking students a few more years to get a job where they get benefits. My nephew is turning 26 next month, and is a type 1 diabetic. Despite the fact that he has been working almost steadily since he graduated from college 2+ years ago, he has been on contract positions, where he gets no benefits. He just recently got his first job, with his own health insurance. He was really on pins for the last year. Going without insurance is not an optional him. Right, but they're not forcing people to go on their own insurance if it's offered which is kind of weird. They can refuse to cover a spouse if they have coverage available elsewhere, but not a child that has coverage somewhere else. We have people that have been working at our company for years that are still covered under their parents insurance even though our company covers almost the entire cost of single coverage. It's something like $80/month for a $500 deductible PPO plan.
|
|
adela76
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 29, 2011 19:15:12 GMT -5
Posts: 125
|
Post by adela76 on Oct 18, 2017 7:19:32 GMT -5
I'm curious how that would be enforced, or even how the current rule about spouses is enforced. Someone mentioned above that a working spouse would have to provide a letter from their employer stating that they don't provide insurance in order to get included in the other spouse's coverage. What if you don't work? What if you freelance? What kind of documentation could you provide? Maybe a prior-year tax return showing no additional income?
That's why I'm wondering if they decided that maybe it wasn't worth it to enforce for kids up to 26. I can get a letter proving that I *have* health insurance - who's going to give me a letter that proves I don't have health insurance available, especially if I'm an unemployed new grad?
It's also probably more lucrative for the insurance companies if the parents keep paying for that more expensive PPO family plan for 4-8 more years, than for the grown kid to sign up for the bare-bones HMO through their employer at 22 (or go without for a few years). Actually, I think that's probably why the rule is the way it is. Employers were probably responsible for the rules that would kick the kids off at 18 because they were trying to limit their expenses, since employers typically pay the majority of the cost. Insurance companies would love to keep taking premiums for a (generally) healthy and low-risk population of 18-26 year olds.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2017 7:27:10 GMT -5
Just got the Blue Cross renewal notice. Our current monthly premium is $1,729.41. They picked the "comparable " plan, Blue Advantage Gold 2500. The monthly premium will be $3,273.12. Just under $40,000. for a year of premiums. Our business has 5 employees. We don't make enough to cover employee health insurance. With my part-time second job, we will gross just under $70,000. this year. Too much for Obamacare premiums. My husband is suggesting we roll the dice and drop the insurance. He needs cataract surgery. The new plan has an individual out-of-pocket max of $7,350 and a $2,500 deductible. The super-duper plan still won't cover the surgery anyway. The next lower plan is ~$2,660 per month. I have no idea what we are really going to do. For 2 people? There is nothing but a Gold plan available? Exchange plans arent available for review review I thought until Nov 1st?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 18, 2017 7:50:13 GMT -5
I'm not surprised at all. I see myself among the new uninsured.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,414
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Oct 18, 2017 8:26:14 GMT -5
I'm curious how that would be enforced, or even how the current rule about spouses is enforced. Someone mentioned above that a working spouse would have to provide a letter from their employer stating that they don't provide insurance in order to get included in the other spouse's coverage. What if you don't work? What if you freelance? What kind of documentation could you provide? Maybe a prior-year tax return showing no additional income?
I had to provide our marriage license and the first page of last year's tax return. We don't have the rule about spouses having to take coverage from their employer if offered. I am assuming they wanted our taxes since the marriage license just proves at some point we were married, not that we currently still are.
When we had to go on DH's insurance when I was unemployed they did have that rule and I had to provide proof I had lost my job in order to qualify. That was in the form of my termination letter.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Oct 18, 2017 10:01:21 GMT -5
I'm curious how that would be enforced, or even how the current rule about spouses is enforced. Someone mentioned above that a working spouse would have to provide a letter from their employer stating that they don't provide insurance in order to get included in the other spouse's coverage. What if you don't work? What if you freelance? What kind of documentation could you provide? Maybe a prior-year tax return showing no additional income? That's why I'm wondering if they decided that maybe it wasn't worth it to enforce for kids up to 26. I can get a letter proving that I *have* health insurance - who's going to give me a letter that proves I don't have health insurance available, especially if I'm an unemployed new grad? It's also probably more lucrative for the insurance companies if the parents keep paying for that more expensive PPO family plan for 4-8 more years, than for the grown kid to sign up for the bare-bones HMO through their employer at 22 (or go without for a few years). Actually, I think that's probably why the rule is the way it is. Employers were probably responsible for the rules that would kick the kids off at 18 because they were trying to limit their expenses, since employers typically pay the majority of the cost. Insurance companies would love to keep taking premiums for a (generally) healthy and low-risk population of 18-26 year olds. As I remember the prices, there was not a large difference in cost between a family policy vs a employee + spouse policy. Also, you pay a set price, so a family policy costs the same whether you have 1 kid or 10. Insurance companies would make way more money if they forced each individual kid to get a single policy when they turned 18. ETA.....for me, to get insurance on me and show I wasn't employed, was on the tax form.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 18, 2017 10:44:43 GMT -5
I sometimes wonder if my employer will eventually stop offering family coverage altogether. It costs them about 3x more than single coverage ($7K/year vs. $19K when you factor in their HSA contribution), and most of my coworkers have at least a spouse or kids on their policy. At some point, it's no longer going to be cost-effective for them to subsidize it. On the other hand, a lot of people would quit... You work for the state or local govt, right? DH works for the state, and in our state I cannot be on DH's health insurance since I have a job that offers a health insurance plan to me. If I wanted to enroll in his coverage, I think I have to get a letter or something from my employer that states they don't offer me the option of health insurance. That rule came about in 2003 or so - but if you were a state employee before then with your spouse on your insurance, they were grandfathered in and are still allowed on the plan. Thankfully the kids can be on DH's policy, though. Yes, state. I vaguely remember having to prove DH and I were married during an audit a few years ago, but I think that was just weeding out the easy pickings. We only have single and family coverage (no employee + spouse) so I don't think they could easily enforce a "no insurance if your spouse has access to it" rule yet, but I could see it coming. (Hopefully not anytime soon--I think technically DH's employer offers insurance but the single rate is something crazy like $250/week, and of the three of us, he's the only one who really "uses" insurance. )
|
|
readergirl
New Member
Joined: May 2, 2013 8:09:44 GMT -5
Posts: 33
|
Post by readergirl on Oct 18, 2017 12:32:34 GMT -5
Yes, the $3273. is for the gold plan. The cheapest bronze plan is $2186 for 2 people. No prescriptions, $7150 deductible. We would still be better off saving the money and paying as we go.
|
|
spartan7886
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 7, 2011 14:04:22 GMT -5
Posts: 788
|
Post by spartan7886 on Oct 18, 2017 15:54:38 GMT -5
I just got a text from ODS "Mom can you call me tonight about health insurance" so I guess it is his annual enrollment. I just got mine at work. He will be turning 26 next July so will have to get insurance through his work. He is on mine now, and I will still need family coverage for YDS, so it does not cost anything extra to leave ODS on my plan. But he will have to start paying in August. It will probably be $100 a month for him. This was something I never understood about the ACA when they removed the Student requirement. Why did they write it that way. People that are working and are offered insurance through their employment still shouldn't be on their parents. I get that "kids" that are struggling and didn't go on to school still need to stay on their parents, but 4 extra years for many people working full time (think from age 22 to 26) is opposite of trying to get more people to pay into the insurance pool to lower total costs to everyone. He should check to make sure "aging" out is a valid event to allow signing up out of the open enrollment period. That $100/mo overlap is cheap for ~8-9 months versus having to find a temporary policy. Losing insurance is a qualifying event. It does not matter why you lost it.
|
|
alabamagal
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 11:30:29 GMT -5
Posts: 8,122
|
Post by alabamagal on Oct 18, 2017 16:53:21 GMT -5
This was something I never understood about the ACA when they removed the Student requirement. Why did they write it that way. People that are working and are offered insurance through their employment still shouldn't be on their parents. I get that "kids" that are struggling and didn't go on to school still need to stay on their parents, but 4 extra years for many people working full time (think from age 22 to 26) is opposite of trying to get more people to pay into the insurance pool to lower total costs to everyone. He should check to make sure "aging" out is a valid event to allow signing up out of the open enrollment period. That $100/mo overlap is cheap for ~8-9 months versus having to find a temporary policy. Losing insurance is a qualifying event. It does not matter why you lost it. Had a good talk with DS last night. He is going to wait until his birthday and see what his options are. As far as being in the insurance pool, he is in it, just on my company's plan not his. I pay an extra $1200 per year and my employer pays an extra $6000 per year for family coverage. Due to my kids age, I happen to have 2 in the 23-25 age range. But for the last 3 years the only claims have been for an eye infection. My 23 year old has an internship that doesn't have benefits, but when he finishes it his pay will go up significantly and he will be eligible for health insurance. That may be about the time my 25 year old turns 26 and I can save my $100 per month. The 25 yo has great coverage through his job (insurance company) and also through his wife's job (teacher) and can easily afford premiums, but why pay when he gets for free on my policy.
|
|
wvugurl26
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 15:25:30 GMT -5
Posts: 21,747
|
Post by wvugurl26 on Oct 18, 2017 18:22:29 GMT -5
We recently got the employee plus one option in addition to single and family. It can be a spouse or a child. When the Supreme Court ruling came down about gay marriage, they gave domestic partners x months to get legally married or lose their coverage.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2017 19:54:32 GMT -5
Reading the collective bargaining unit agreement for local district with open job... they pay 2300 if you don’t take insurance. Since the agreement discusses possible Cadillac tax, Im guessing it’s still quite under what the plan would cost. Just thought it was interesting, since we were discussing it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2017 21:16:13 GMT -5
Losing insurance is a qualifying event. It does not matter why you lost it. Had a good talk with DS last night. He is going to wait until his birthday and see what his options are. As far as being in the insurance pool, he is in it, just on my company's plan not his. I pay an extra $1200 per year and my employer pays an extra $6000 per year for family coverage. Due to my kids age, I happen to have 2 in the 23-25 age range. But for the last 3 years the only claims have been for an eye infection. My 23 year old has an internship that doesn't have benefits, but when he finishes it his pay will go up significantly and he will be eligible for health insurance. That may be about the time my 25 year old turns 26 and I can save my $100 per month. The 25 yo has great coverage through his job (insurance company) and also through his wife's job (teacher) and can easily afford premiums, but why pay when he gets for free on my policy. Yes, our young teachers go for free as well. Ours is only $35 a month for single coverage, but free is free. That sounds wrong. But it also sounds wrong that the federal government makes employers of a certain size primary coverage for Medicare-eligible insurees whose spouses still work. DH has cost our insurance program hundreds of thousands of dollars. He pays for Medicare, but they have paid a pittance.
|
|
countrygirl2
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 7, 2016 15:45:05 GMT -5
Posts: 17,017
|
Post by countrygirl2 on Oct 21, 2017 3:59:38 GMT -5
When my husband worked they had a strange deal. If I had insurance elsewhere like medicare we had to pay a $100 a month penalty to his insurance company, why I don't know.
I am getting ready to look at AARP for our supplement, it covers dental, eye, and scripts, don't know the cost or if it covers deductibles and stuff too, but need to look.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2017 8:03:35 GMT -5
That sounds wrong. But it also sounds wrong that the federal government makes employers of a certain size primary coverage for Medicare-eligible insurees whose spouses still work. DH has cost our insurance program hundreds of thousands of dollars. He pays for Medicare, but they have paid a pittance. My late DH was on my employers' health insurance from 2003 when we married (he was 65 and had just retired) to 2014 when I retired. He didn't sign up for Medicare till I retired and there were no penalties because he had had "creditable coverage" through my jobs from age 65 to when he signed up. So, just curious- why is your DH paying Medicare premiums?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2017 11:19:32 GMT -5
That sounds wrong. But it also sounds wrong that the federal government makes employers of a certain size primary coverage for Medicare-eligible insurees whose spouses still work. DH has cost our insurance program hundreds of thousands of dollars. He pays for Medicare, but they have paid a pittance. My late DH was on my employers' health insurance from 2003 when we married (he was 65 and had just retired) to 2014 when I retired. He didn't sign up for Medicare till I retired and there were no penalties because he had had "creditable coverage" through my jobs from age 65 to when he signed up. So, just curious- why is your DH paying Medicare premiums? We knew when we married that his health care costs could be astronomical. Medicare is an inexpensive supplement at this point. He has had 18 hospitalizations in the 7 years that we have been married. It turned out to be a very wise decision for us. He has had almost zero medical bills. We have already begun to research how we will handle this once I retire. I do feel bad, though, for Peehip because it has been very expensive for them. It just seems logical that Medicare would be primary once you hit 65.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2017 14:21:59 GMT -5
We knew when we married that his health care costs could be astronomical. Medicare is an inexpensive supplement at this point. He has had 18 hospitalizations in the 7 years that we have been married. It turned out to be a very wise decision for us. He has had almost zero medical bills. OK- you had mentioned that Medicare had paid "a pittance" but I can see that it might be worth the premiums just for the extra security.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2017 15:08:07 GMT -5
We knew when we married that his health care costs could be astronomical. Medicare is an inexpensive supplement at this point. He has had 18 hospitalizations in the 7 years that we have been married. It turned out to be a very wise decision for us. He has had almost zero medical bills. OK- you had mentioned that Medicare had paid "a pittance" but I can see that it might be worth the premiums just for the extra security. I meant a pittance compared to what Peehip, the state's program for educators, has had to pay. Medicare covers all his co-pays for non-prescription stuff. After meeting his Medicare deductible, they pay his Peehip deductibles and the 20% for Major Medical. They've even paid for procedures that Peehip has refused like the procedure to inject cement (!) between some of the collapsed vertebrae in his back. They pay back way more each year than we pay in premiums. That wasn't what I meant. It's been a good deal for us personally. Peehip just gets screwed because my insurance is primary even though DH qualifies for Medicare. I guess it's a good deal for us tax payers, though.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 2, 2024 2:34:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2017 15:20:51 GMT -5
They've even paid for procedures that Peehip has refused like the procedure to inject cement (!) between some of the collapsed vertebrae in his back. Interesting that Peehip refused that- DH had to have that when he fell and sustained compression fractures in 2 vertebrae and it was minimally invasive and very effective. I was impressed. The first time DH's providers submitted a claim to Medicare they bounced it back and said his primary coverage was through my employer (which they named) and we had to submit it to their plan first. I found it interesting that Medicare had that information- maybe the healthcare providers had the old policy info in their records and transmitted it along with the Medicare claim? Oh, well- easily cleared up.
|
|
plugginaway22
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 10:18:42 GMT -5
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by plugginaway22 on Oct 28, 2017 7:37:00 GMT -5
I am worried for our upcoming renewal at my small company (less than 50 employees), the broker is finding nothing with less than a 25% increase. Staff will be upset when they see that. DH's company carries 3 of us for less than what I would pay individually at my company.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 28, 2017 8:39:54 GMT -5
My new premium is $1241 a month. One provider so they can charge whatever they want.
|
|
saveinla
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 2:00:29 GMT -5
Posts: 5,234
|
Post by saveinla on Oct 28, 2017 10:32:22 GMT -5
Our premiums went up 7$ per paycheck after 3 years of no rate increases. I'll take that
|
|