Quote:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/06/report-one-obamacare-tax-could-cost-up-to-286000-jobs/?print=1

Report: One Obamacare Tax Could Cost Up To 286,000 Jobs
Posted By Sarah Hurtubise

Just one of Obamacare’s many taxes could cost the U.S. hundreds of thousands of jobs over the next decade, according to an industry report published Tuesday.
[A bunch of smaller taxes are harder to notice than the total tax we must pay for Obamacare]

The National Federation of Independent Business projects that between 152,000 and 286,000 jobs will be lost by 2023 due to Obamacare’s health insurance tax. NFIB, a nonprofit association of business owners, actively supports the repeal of the tax.
NFIB: http://www.nfib.com/surveys/hit-cost/?utm_campaign=HIT&utm_source=Research&utm_medium=Release&utm_content=hitcost

The health insurance tax has proved to be one of Obamacare’s more controversial fundraising measures. The tax targets insurance companies, charging each one proportional to their market share — the more health plans sold (Obamacare’s goal, the more insurers are required to pay).
[IOW, according to SCOTUS, they tax you if you do or they tax you if you don't!]

The report found that the tax will cause a spike in the cost of employer-sponsored health coverage, which will lead primarily small businesses to cut jobs. NFIB estimates that 57 percent of the job losses will come from small businesses — firms with under 500 employees, according to the federal Small Business Administration.

The cut in employment would results in a reduction of U.S. real output, or sales, of between $20 billion and $33 billion through 2023.
[It's an increase in production cost across the board, reducing exports]

Obamacare’s health insurance tax “represents a new tax on small business that raises insurance costs for an already struggling Main Street and is contrary to the goals of health care reform,” said NFIB’s Amanda Austin, the director of federal public policy. “Singling out job creators for tax increases makes no sense for our economy, is short-sighted and wrong for our nation’s growth.”

Some states will be disproportionately affected by the projected job losses. California will be hit the hardest, suffering 23,00 jobs lost by 2023 and a lost $4 billion in sales for small businesses, according to the report.
[See states below]

Texas should expect to lose 14,500 jobs by 2023 due to the tax, and duly $2.5 billion in small business sales; Florida is projected to lose 9,700 jobs and $1.2 in small business sales; and in Illinois, 5,500 job lost and $1 billion in small business sales.

The federal government expects to collect $8 billion from the tax in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, with the pot growing to $14.3 billion by 2018. While the Obama administration may have intended for the tax to take a hit at insurers’ profits, the cost of the tax will likely be passed along to those purchasing the plans — which in the vast majority of cases are employers.
[Obama campaigned that the tax came from insurance co,'s while the Obamacare law allows for a whopping 20% Oh & Profit ...doesn't take long to figure that one out!]

The American Action Forum, a Washington-based free-market think tank, estimates that the health insurance tax will add $101 onto customers’ premiums in 2014 and $143 in 2015 and 2016.
[Cuts directly into disposable income spent in OUR economy.]

• 
  
• HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE UPDATE:
  California: 23,000 jobs lost by 2023; $4.0 billion in sales lost for California small business
  Colorado: 4,100 jobs lost by 2023; $870 million in sales lost for Colorado small business
  Florida: 9,700 jobs lost by 2023; $1.2 billion in sales lost for Florida small business
  Illinois: 5,500 jobs lost by 2023; $1.0 billion in sales lost for Illinois small business
  Massachusetts: 1,500 jobs lost by 2023; $450 million in sales lost for Massachusetts small business
  New Jersey: 2,000 jobs lost by 2023; $380 million in sales lost for New Jersey small business
  New York: 2,800 jobs lost by 2023; $630 million in sales lost for New York small business
  Ohio: 5,900 jobs lost by 2023; $1 billion is sales lost for Ohio small business
  Pennsylvania: 4,700 jobs lost by 2023; $790 million in sales lost for Pennsylvania small business
  Texas: 14,500 jobs lost by 2023; $2.5 billion in sales lost for Texas small business
  West Virginia: 2,200 jobs lost by 2023; $230 million in sales lost for West Virginia small business

Quote:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/06/major-insurers-to-testify-that-10-20-percent-failed-to-pay-premiums-by-deadlines/?print=1

Major Insurers To Testify That 10-20 Percent Failed To Pay Premiums By Deadlines
Posted By Sarah Hurtubise

Three major health insurers had between 80 and 90 percent of Obamacare sign-ups pay their insurance premiums, according to testimonies prepared for a Wednesday hearing.

Executives from WellPoint, Aetna and Blue Cross Blue Shield will testify to the House Energy and Commerce Committee Wednesday regarding enrollment in Obamacare exchanges.

WellPoint and Blue Cross Blue Shield appear to have no new information to add from an Energy and Commerce Committee report released last week that found that by April 15, across all insurers operating in federally-run Obamacare exchanges, just 67 percent of sign-ups had paid their premiums, although the deadline to pay had not passed for all premiums.

The report was the first official data on the rate of premium payments from the federal government.

According to testimony from Dennis Matheis of WellPoint, the WellPoint data submitted to House Republicans indicated that when calculated, considering all those who signed up for coverage, roughly 70 percent had paid premiums by April 15, in line with Republicans’ overall findings.

When only exchange applications whose payment deadline had passed by April 15 were considered, WellPoint would only say that “ranging up to 90 percent” had paid, “depending on the state.”

Aetna’s Paul Wingle will testify that the payment rate, again among sign-ups whose payment deadline had passed by the third week of April, “has been in the low- to mid-80 percent range,” in line with ongoing industry estimates of a total payment rate.

J. Darren Rodgers of Health Care Service Corporation, which does business as Blue Cross and Blue Shield in several states, cited payment rates as each month’s deadline passed.

By April 1, 83 percent of the company’s sign-ups whose deadline had passed had paid their premium. By May 1, that number dropped to 68 percent, again in line with House Republicans’ totals, but the payment deadline for all policies effective May 1 may not yet have passed.

The testimonies don’t vary much from House Republicans’ report, which included all 160 insurance carriers active in the federally-run Obamacare exchanges. The committee plans to update their report May 20, when final due dates for premium payments will have passed for most sign-ups.

The Obama administration has been mum regarding payment data for months. By the time insurance coverage became active in January, some sign-ups from the first three months of open enrollment who failed to pay their premiums could have been removed from the official sign-ups tally, but the Obama administration refused to do so.

Rodgers’ testimony includes payment dates beginning Jan. 1, however. Across Health Care Service Corporation sign-ups, 85 percent of those who applied for coverage beginning Jan. 1 paid their premiums by the deadline.

While updated data is clearly available from insurers, the Obama administration continues to tout that exchanges have signed up 8 million people.

The Energy and Commerce Committee will meet with the representatives of all three insurers and other industry officials Wednesday at 10:15 a.m.

Quote:

 

Dennis Matheis of WellPoint
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20140507/102194/HHRG-113-IF02-Wstate-MatheisD-20140507.pdf

• 
  
• May 7, 2014...
  ...The data included enrollees whose policies have effective dates of April 1, May 1, and June 1 – which means that premiums for such policies would not be due until April 10th, May 10th and June 10th, respectively.
  ...reported enrollment and premium payment data is subject to adjustments. For example, enrollees may elect to drop their coverage, elect to change the effective date of their coverage after submission of their application, or continue to enroll through special enrollment periods.
  In response to the Committee’s request, we submitted the total number of applications received for enrollment in the Federally Facilitated Exchange during the period October 1, 2013 through April 15, 2014. The percentage of applicants that have paid a premium will differ depending on whether the percentage is calculated based on the total number of applications and premium payments received during this entire time period (roughly 70 percent) or is calculated based on the total number of applications and premium payments received for policies whose premium deadline has passed (ranging up to 90 percent depending on the state).

Quote:

 

Aetna’s Paul Wingle
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20140507/102194/HHRG-113-IF02-Wstate-WingleP-20140507.pdf

• May 7, 2014...
  As of the third week of April, Aetna had over 600,000 members who had enrolled, and roughly 500,000 members who paid [83%]. [running close to that percentage on payments due][no separation of on & off exchange numbers]

Quote:

 

J. Darren Rodgers of Health Care Service Corporation
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20140507/102194/HHRG-113-IF02-Wstate-RodgersJ-20140507.pdf

• May 1, 2014...
  HCSC's Enrollment Experience
  At the current time enrollment and payment information (both on and OFF exchanges) can only be presented as of each day when the numbers are counted. ...applicants of policies with an effective date of May 1 may still have time remaining in their payment deadline.
  ...adjustments and reconciliations to this data occurring between the exchanges and HCSC during the implementation process are ongoing...
  ...HSCS records show [on-exchange... 1/1=85%, 2/1=86%, 3/1=88%, 4/1=83%, 5/1=68%]

chatham

May 7 2014, 04:35 PM

who woulda thunk it?

http://rare.us/story/hhs-reporting-obamacare-enrollment-duplications/

Obamacare
HHS reporting ObamaCare enrollment duplications
naomi
Naomi Lopez-Bauman, Rare Contributor
Posted on May 7, 2014 3:56 pm
- See more at: http://rare.us/story/hhs-reporting-obamacare-enrollment-duplications/#sthash.jYU3HbyX.dpuf

LTC8K6

May 7 2014, 08:43 PM

snip

It just occurred to me that this could have been an attempt to deal with a high number of duplicate/multiple accounts.

kbp

May 7 2014, 02:31 PM

Quote:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/06/major-insurers-to-testify-that-10-20-percent-failed-to-pay-premiums-by-deadlines/?print=1

Major Insurers To Testify That 10-20 Percent Failed To Pay Premiums By Deadlines
Posted By Sarah Hurtubise

Three major health insurers had between 80 and 90 percent of Obamacare sign-ups pay their insurance premiums, according to testimonies prepared for a Wednesday hearing.

Executives from WellPoint, Aetna and Blue Cross Blue Shield will testify to the House Energy and Commerce Committee Wednesday regarding enrollment in Obamacare exchanges.

WellPoint and Blue Cross Blue Shield appear to have no new information to add from an Energy and Commerce Committee report released last week that found that by April 15, across all insurers operating in federally-run Obamacare exchanges, just 67 percent of sign-ups had paid their premiums, although the deadline to pay had not passed for all premiums.

The report was the first official data on the rate of premium payments from the federal government.

According to testimony from Dennis Matheis of WellPoint, the WellPoint data submitted to House Republicans indicated that when calculated, considering all those who signed up for coverage, roughly 70 percent had paid premiums by April 15, in line with Republicans’ overall findings.

When only exchange applications whose payment deadline had passed by April 15 were considered, WellPoint would only say that “ranging up to 90 percent” had paid, “depending on the state.”

Aetna’s Paul Wingle will testify that the payment rate, again among sign-ups whose payment deadline had passed by the third week of April, “has been in the low- to mid-80 percent range,” in line with ongoing industry estimates of a total payment rate.

J. Darren Rodgers of Health Care Service Corporation, which does business as Blue Cross and Blue Shield in several states, cited payment rates as each month’s deadline passed.

By April 1, 83 percent of the company’s sign-ups whose deadline had passed had paid their premium. By May 1, that number dropped to 68 percent, again in line with House Republicans’ totals, but the payment deadline for all policies effective May 1 may not yet have passed.

The testimonies don’t vary much from House Republicans’ report, which included all 160 insurance carriers active in the federally-run Obamacare exchanges. The committee plans to update their report May 20, when final due dates for premium payments will have passed for most sign-ups.

The Obama administration has been mum regarding payment data for months. By the time insurance coverage became active in January, some sign-ups from the first three months of open enrollment who failed to pay their premiums could have been removed from the official sign-ups tally, but the Obama administration refused to do so.

Rodgers’ testimony includes payment dates beginning Jan. 1, however. Across Health Care Service Corporation sign-ups, 85 percent of those who applied for coverage beginning Jan. 1 paid their premiums by the deadline.

While updated data is clearly available from insurers, the Obama administration continues to tout that exchanges have signed up 8 million people.

The Energy and Commerce Committee will meet with the representatives of all three insurers and other industry officials Wednesday at 10:15 a.m.

Data from the links of the direct answers provided by the "three major health insurers...

Quote:

 

Dennis Matheis of WellPoint
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20140507/102194/HHRG-113-IF02-Wstate-MatheisD-20140507.pdf

• 
  
• May 7, 2014...
  ...The data included enrollees whose policies have effective dates of April 1, May 1, and June 1 – which means that premiums for such policies would not be due until April 10th, May 10th and June 10th, respectively.
  ...reported enrollment and premium payment data is subject to adjustments. For example, enrollees may elect to drop their coverage, elect to change the effective date of their coverage after submission of their application, or continue to enroll through special enrollment periods.
  In response to the Committee’s request, we submitted the total number of applications received for enrollment in the Federally Facilitated Exchange during the period October 1, 2013 through April 15, 2014. The percentage of applicants that have paid a premium will differ depending on whether the percentage is calculated based on the total number of applications and premium payments received during this entire time period (roughly 70 percent) or is calculated based on the total number of applications and premium payments received for policies whose premium deadline has passed (ranging up to 90 percent depending on the state).

Quote:

 

Aetna’s Paul Wingle
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20140507/102194/HHRG-113-IF02-Wstate-WingleP-20140507.pdf

• May 7, 2014...
  As of the third week of April, Aetna had over 600,000 members who had enrolled, and roughly 500,000 members who paid [83%]. [running close to that percentage on payments due][no separation of on & off exchange numbers]

Quote:

 

J. Darren Rodgers of Health Care Service Corporation
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20140507/102194/HHRG-113-IF02-Wstate-RodgersJ-20140507.pdf

• May 1, 2014...
  HCSC's Enrollment Experience
  At the current time enrollment and payment information (both on and OFF exchanges) can only be presented as of each day when the numbers are counted. ...applicants of policies with an effective date of May 1 may still have time remaining in their payment deadline.
  ...adjustments and reconciliations to this data occurring between the exchanges and HCSC during the implementation process are ongoing...
  ...HSCS records show [on-exchange... 1/1=85%, 2/1=86%, 3/1=88%, 4/1=83%, 5/1=68%]

To start off here, note that "sign ups" do NOT equal the enrollment numbers used to determine the percentage, it is a numbers game HHS is playing. IIRC, the 8 million "sign ups" Obama claimed may have translated into 6 million or less enrollments that decided to get the policy they had in their shopping carts (need to recheck that number!).

None of the three responses includes adjustments for enrollees that have since dropped the coverage.

The payment due date is all over the place, but never prior to coverage start date... the pay later plan will meet the payment due on time next month reality!


...The data included enrollees whose policies have effective dates of April 1, May 1, and June 1 – which means that premiums for such policies would not be due until April 10th, May 10th and June 10th, respectively

I am not aware of any open enrollments for on-exchange plans that start June 1. The extended April 15 date was for May 1 coverage as far as I know.


....adjustments and reconciliations to this data occurring between the exchanges and HCSC during the implementation process are ongoing..

HHS is getting information from the insurance companies daily, while denying that they have the numbers available. The 80%+ paid percentage is not something HHS should want to hide, it's better than many had guessed. The only conclusion I can reach is they're hiding the variance between their "sign ups" and the actual enrollment.

Good enrollment numbers here would not make Obamacare a success, but it sure has become a big mystery game in the process as if it was the only factor controlling the outcome!

Quote:

 

Mark Pratt of State Affairs America’s Health Insurance Plans
http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF02/20140507/102194/HHRG-113-IF02-Wstate-PrattM-20140507.pdf

• May 7, 2014...
  
  

Quote:

 

Such practices could raise concerns about discrimination, said Sabrina Corlette, project director at the Georgetown University Center on Health Insurance Reforms.

They could also cause resentment among employees who didn't get a similar deal, Fensholt said.

"We just don't think that's a good idea,” he said. "That needs to be kind of an under-the-radar deal, and under-the-radar deals never work," he said. Plus, he added, "it's bad public policy to push all these risks into the public exchange."