In the USA Today, Michael Cannon and Jonathan H. Adler write:
Even if the Affordable Care Act survives its first Supreme Court test … the lawsuits won’t end. Citizens have already filed challenges to what critics call the law’s “death panel” and its impact on privacy rights, religious liberty and physician-owned hospitals. Still another potential lawsuit poses as great a threat to the law as the case now before the high court.
Under the guise of implementing the law, the Internal Revenue Service has announced it will impose a tax of up to $3,000 per worker on employers whom Congress has not authorized a tax. To make things more interesting: If the IRS doesn’t impose that unauthorized tax, the whole law could collapse.
Read the whole article: If ObamaCare survives the Supreme Court, legal battle has just begun.
For more, listen to this Cato Institute podcast with Adler:
From the National Center for Policy Analysis:
In a new report prepared for Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp R-Mich., data from Americas Fortune 100 companies show they could save hundreds of millions of dollars a year under the new health care law by simply terminating health insurance for their workers and dumping these employees into taxpayer-funded health care exchanges.
Read more here: Job-Based Health Coverage to Become Even More Expensive under Affordable Care Act.
John Stossel writes:
President Obama says his health care “reform” will be good for business.Business has learned the truth. Three successful businessmen came on my Fox Business show last week to explain how Obamacare is a reason that unemployment stays high. Its length and complexity make businessmen wary of expanding.
You would think a piece of legislation more than a thousand pages long would at least be clear about the specifics. But a lot of those pages say: “The secretary will determine …” That means the secretary of Health and Human Services will announce the rules sometime in the future. How can a business make plans in such a fog?
Read the whole article Is Obamacare Stopping Businesses From Hiring? – Reason Magazine.
Diana Furchtgott-Roth writes:
Cornell University economics professor Richard Burkhauser showed that in 2014, millions of low-income Americans may be unable to get subsidized health insurance through the new health care exchanges. …
If the firm does offer health insurance, the worker with dependents will prefer that the coverage is unaffordable. That’s not a typo — if the coverage is unaffordable, then the employee will be able to buy health insurance for his family on the exchange.
A firm that offers unaffordable coverage will have to pay a penalty of $3,000 per worker. But workers would prefer to receive a lower salary, have the employer pay the $3,000 penalty, and be able to buy subsidized health insurance on the exchange.
This causes substantial disincentives to marriage. …
Read more at the Washington Examiner: Another unpleasant surprise from Obamacare.
The New York Times reports:
The new health care law is supposed to fix the problem by guaranteeing access to affordable coverage for all [sic]. But many nursing homes and home care agencies, alarmed at the cost of providing health insurance to hundreds of thousands of health care workers, have started a lobbying effort seeking some kind of exemption or special treatment. …
Mark Parkinson, president of the American Health Care Association, the largest trade group for nursing homes, says the problem is that reimbursement rates for Medicaid and Medicare, set by government agencies, do not pay them enough to offer their employees medical coverage. “We do not have much ability to increase prices because we are so dependent on Medicaid and Medicare” for revenue, he said.
via Nursing Homes Seeking Reprieve From Health Care Law – NYTimes.com.
See also “Number of healthcare reform law waivers climbs above 1,000,” at TheHill.com.
The health control legislation known as ObamaCare (HR 3590) has an employer mandate provision for those who hire more than 50 people, as I’ve written before, this is a terrible idea. Diana Furchtgott-Roth of the Manhatten Institute explains how the employer mandate harms low-skilled and part-time workers:
…come 2014, the new health care bill will make it harder for employers to hire low-skill workers. And, as workplaces around the country prepare to implement the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, employers are considering how best to comply. For some companies, that means that low-wage and part-time jobs will start to go, not in 2014, but now.
Industries that have traditionally offered the most opportunities to low-skill workers – leisure and hospitality, and the retail trade – will be particularly hard-hit by the new law. Many employers do not provide their employees with health insurance, and both sectors have large percentages of part-time workers, whose cost of hiring will increase significantly.
Under the new law, every employer with more than 50 workers will either have to offer health insurance or pay an annual penalty. The penalty for full-time employees is $2,000 per worker. For part-timers, employers will pay $2,000 for each “full-time equivalent worker,” a block of 30 weekly hours of part-time work by the same or different employees.
Read the whole article: Healthcare’s Impact On the Low-Skilled Worker.