From Deirdre Walsh and Dana Bash, CNN
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters he remains "hopeful" that Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley, the Democratic nominee, will defeat Brown.
But if she does not, passing the Senate version would be "clearly better than nothing," he said.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi added, "Whatever happens in Massachusetts, we will have quality, affordable health care for all Americans, and it will be soon."
Several Democratic congressional sources tell CNN that having the House approve the Senate bill is probably the best of a series of bad options to pass health care reform in the event of a Brown victory.
Before Christmas, Pelosi rejected the idea of passing an unamended version of the Senate bill. At the time, she cited several key differences between the Senate and House bills.
But Democratic congressional sources now say the White House is privately laying the groundwork for the idea, hoping that enough House Democratic lawmakers may change their minds if confronted with the idea of not passing any bill.
A House decision to pass the Senate bill with no changes probably would have to be tied to a promise from the Senate leadership to pass changes favored by the House in the future, sources say.
"I would be willing to listen to ways to maybe do a two-bill strategy if that were necessary," Connecticut Democratic Rep. Joe Courtney told CNN in an interview.
"I just think there are so many flaws, I think a lot of House members would really struggle to do one vote and walk away with the Senate bill as is."
Courtney is a vocal opponent of the Senate bill's tax on high-cost plans, saying it would hit too many working Americans.
One senior Democratic source told CNN that one of the many problems with this plan is House Democrats' distrust of the Senate. Courtney said he agrees.
"The inter-chamber tension is real. There is just no denying it," he said.
"The White House and the president would play a key role in terms of just trying to create a lead-pipe certainty that if there is a multistep process, that they're going to be there to ensure everybody lives up to their end of the deal."
Relations between the chambers have become so bad, the source said, that House Democrats may not believe Senate Democrats will follow through on promises to make changes later.
Hoyer said it would be possible for both chambers to pass a bill within 15 days after Tuesday's election, which could be the deadline for the Massachusetts secretary of state to certify a Brown victory and thereby allow Brown to be officially seated in the Senate.
But Hoyer's office later sent out an e-mail noting that the majority leader "did not say that [the bill] would be passed in that time."
Regardless, several Democratic sources have told CNN that option is extremely unlikely because of the political fallout of trying to push something through at a time when voters in Massachusetts may be demonstrating that the health care bill is unpopular at the polls.
Hoyer said that Democratic leaders are making progress in negotiating a final bill. "Our objective is to get agreement, not to take the Senate bill or the House bill, but to come to an agreement, as is normal legislative process," he said.
Hoyer pushed back against the notion that the Massachusetts special election is a harbinger for what Democrats will face in the November midterms.
"I don't need the Massachusetts race to tell me the psyche of the American people. I just need to go to the grocery store," he said. "People are angry, people are fearful, people are very concerned about where the economy is."
But, Hoyer said, Democrats are responding to the sentiment by focusing on jobs, fiscal responsibility and health care reform.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
House may be considering passing unamended Senate health care measure
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Health Care Debate Divides Small-Biz Groups
Entrepreneur – Daily Dose Blog
By: Carol Tice
No issue has polarized the small-business community in recent years like healthcare reform. With Congress back in session, all eyes will be on the lawmakers tackling the daunting task of reconciling the House and Senate versions of the healthcare reform bill.
Change won't come fast enough to help small businesses caught in the buzz-saw of steep premium hikes that hit the sector for 2010. But change is likely coming. Will it help small businesses, or will it hurt them?
One of the most vocal groups opposed to healthcare reform is the National Federation of Independent Business, which says 94 percent of their members are against the idea of a mandated payroll tax for businesses that don't offer employees healthcare.
For healthcare reform but opposed to the current legislation, especially the House's "public option" language is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, calling the current bills' mandates "counterproductive" and saying they fail to address the root problem: rising healthcare costs.
More strongly pro-reform is Build a Stronger America, a newly formed group spawned by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. BSA lists the need for healthcare reform as one of its founding tenets.
Views have differed so greatly in the community that the Wall Street Journal recently ran a pro-and-con article with a business owner on each side of the debate airing their views. I thought that summed up the situation--it's a big split out there.
The New York Times' Robb Mandelbaum, in his You're the Boss small-business blog, notes there are key differences in the Senate and House bills, so the reconciliation process will be interesting to watch. The Senate bill is considered easier on small businesses and insurers, while the House bill with its public option is more in line with the original intent of healthcare reform.
Will the public option stay or go? Comments to previous blogs on the Daily Dose have indicated some business owners would like to see healthcare unhooked from employment, and want the public option, while others hate the idea.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
How to start offering a health plan
bizjournals.com - Small Business Center
Health care presents a classic conundrum for employers. On the one hand, providing a health plan as a benefit for employees is very expensive, and it costs more every year. On the other hand, if you don't offer health benefits, and your competitor does, you might find yourself watching some of your best potential employees walk out of a job interview and not look back, says Matt Tassey, a past president of the Life and Health Insurance Foundation for Education (LIFE), a nonprofit organization that educates individuals about seeking and purchasing insurance.
"Virtually any employee who is attractive to a business is attractive to other organizations as well, and health care is the No. 1 thing employees ask about after compensation," Tassey says.
Quick tips
But if you've never offered a health plan at your business before, the research process can plunge you into an unfamiliar world of acronyms - HMO, PPO, HSA- and the options can be overwhelming.
So if it's your first trip into the waters of health insurance shopping, you would probably be wise to work with a broker or insurance adviser. Health insurance can be a confusing consumer decision to make, and having a trained professional on your side can make all the difference, notes Tassey, who recommends that people ask trusted friends, family, or professional contacts what broker they work with to obtain a good list of potential candidates. If you can't get a referral that way and have to resort to cold-calling brokers, ask for the names of two or three of their clients who you can call to ask how satisfied they are with the service they're receiving. Tassey says it's the least you can do when choosing the individual who will handle one of your most important internal business decisions.
"You want to be dealing with an insurance adviser who has experience in your market, and it's very, very appropriate and very much expected for you to ask that person for a couple of references," he says. "If you're in a small business, you've got your family and your business, and probably a pet. But if you're going to marry your life to a business, it pays to take the extra minute and check those references."
Once you've found a broker, Tassey says he or she will help you consider what kind of plans to offer. He says a good broker often can give you a picture of what kind of health care plans are most common in your industry or for businesses of your size so that you can stay competitive.
If you're offering a health benefit for the first time, you'll also need to think about how much of the cost of your employees' health insurance expenses you're willing and able to pay, and whether or not you're willing to pay for health care for dependents of employees. And will you require new employees to work for your company for a certain amount of time before qualifying for benefits?
If you have a small business and choose to research insurance plans independently, without a broker, one piece of information might save you some time. Tassey says the fact of the matter is that where a 500-employee business has some bargaining power when it comes to their health plan rates, small groups are usually quoted a uniform price based on size, and it typically doesn't leave a lot of room for negotiation.
Speaking of price tags, another tip is this: When it comes to choosing a health plan, the bottom line is not always the bottom line. That's to say that while cost is a major concern for almost anyone shopping for health insurance coverage these days, what you get for the money should be considered along with the price tag.
Janice Torrez. of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Mexico, recommends groups and individuals consider the restrictions or options that come with certain plans. For instance, Torrez says, a plan that places no restrictions on what physician a member can see might come at a higher cost. Likewise, a plan with a low monthly premium could sport some whopping out-of-pocket expenses should one need a service like home health care, hospital stays, or medical equipment.
The LIFE organization advises when shopping for a health care plan, businesses and individuals start by considering what health-related services are important to them. Included in the list of services to consider are inpatient hospital services, outpatient surgery, office visits, medical tests and X-rays, prescription drugs, home health care visits, physical therapy, maternity care, preventative care for infants and children, and health screenings. Then compare the cost of plans that offer you those benefits.
What the Senate’s Health Bill Means for Small Business
By ROBB MANDELBAUM
NY Times, You're the Boss Blog
Now that the Senate is finally on the verge of passing a health care bill within the next day, it’s time for The Agenda to review where the upper chamber has come out on the issues most important to small companies. To get to this point, Majority Leader Harry Reid melded competing bills produced by Senator Max Baucus’s Finance Committee and by what was then Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.
So what has Mr. Reid wrought? In all, small companies are treated gently here, despite strident protests to the bill from their lobbyists.
Health insurance exchanges. In addition to establishing an exchange for individuals to buy insurance, states must set up a so-called Small Business Health Options Program (a.k.a, a “SHOP Exchange”) through which small companies can buy insurance. Plans offered on the exchange will have to be standardized for easy comparison and offer minimum levels of benefits established by the bill. (A state may create a single merged exchange for individuals and small groups, or band with other states to form regional exchanges.) Beginning in 2017, a state may allow large companies (with at least 101 employees) to participate in the exchange.
The concept — and name — for a separate state-run small business exchange came from the Baucus bill, which in turn borrowed from the Small Business Health Options Program Act introduced by Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, in 2008. In a negotiation that raised eyebrows in Washington, Mr. Durbin and a bipartisan group of senators wrote the legislation with help from, among others, the National Federation of Independent Business and the Service Employees International Union.*
Regulating the small-group market. Every insurer would have to treat all of its customers in the small-group market as members in a single risk pool. In addition, insurers would be subject to all manner of underwriting restrictions. Beginning in 2014, for example, they could not rate or exclude based on a participant’s health status, and could vary premiums only by geography or age (older people would not pay more than three times what younger adults pay). All insurers would have to provide a minimum benefits package defined by law, and there would be limits on cost-sharing, including the total annual deductible.
Defining a small business. For the purposes of delineating the small-group insurance market that would be regulated under the bill (and for determining which firms can buy insurance through an exchange), a small employer has one to 100 employees. Until the year 2016, however, states can limit the small-group market to firms with 50 or fewer employees. Firms need not worry that they will outgrow their exchange: As long as they continue to offer the insurance, they can buy it on the exchange, even if they exceed 100 employees.
Employer mandate. The smallest firms will still have no obligation to buy health insurance for employees. In fact, technically, this measure doesn’t require any firm to offer insurance. Practically, however, it would have that effect on companies with more than 50 full-time workers. Should such a firm not offer insurance and have just one employee rely on a public subsidy to buy individual insurance through an exchange — and in most cases, he or she will be required to buy it — that company would be subject to a penalty of $750 a year for every full-time employee, regardless of how many take subsidies.
Moreover, the company’s insurance policy has to be affordable: A firm that does offer insurance faces a $3,000 penalty for each full-time employee who takes a public subsidy to pay their share of the premiums, though this, too, is capped at $750 multiplied by the entire full-time work force. In this case, “full-time” means 30 or more hours a week. Finally, the construction industry faces a stiffer requirement: The employee threshold drops from 50 to five.
Small-business tax credits. From 2010 through 2013 — before, that is, the exchanges are established and companies are effectively required to buy insurance for employees — very small businesses would receive a tax credit to offset 35 percent of their health insurance costs, provided the firm contributes at least half of the premium. Then, for the first two years the firm buys insurance through an exchange, the credit increases to 50 percent. The full credit is available to firms with the equivalent of 10 or fewer full-time workers paid, on average, less than $25,000; it phases out as the payroll, excluding seasonal workers, grows to 25 and wages rise to $50,000.
Next year, the House and Senate will have to reconcile their competing bills, and while most analysts expect the conference to go the Senate’s way on the most contentious elements, these provisions may not rise to that level. So before those negotiations begin, we’ll take a close look at the measures in the House bill most affecting small business.
In the meantime, our colleagues on the politics desk have put together this handy interactive comparative guide to the two bills — check it out. And please tell us in your comments what you think all of this will mean for your business.
*Not that the N.F.I.B. supports the present Senate bill. In a press release issued Monday, the organization lamented that the bill headed for passage “does not adequately lower insurance costs and increases the cost of doing business.”
Friday, December 4, 2009
White House Makes Its Case for Health Reform to Small Businesses
Keith Girard
All Business.com
With a vote nearing on the historic health reform legislation, the Obama administration has gone into overdrive in its effort to reach out to small businesses. It wants to assure them that the proposed reforms will not only lower costs, but will allow them to be more competitive in the marketplace.
The task, however, has been daunting. The National Federation of Independent Business last week called the Senate bill, in particular, “disastrous” for small businesses because of “new taxes, the creation of new mandates, and the establishment of new entitlement programs.”
Small businesses have been a flash point in the current debate because they make up roughly 40 percent of the nation’s private labor force, yet have fared the worst under the current system. Recent studies indicate that small businesses are likely to see their premiums rise 15 percent in the coming year, double the rate of last year’s increase.
To help shed some light on the issue, we asked the administration to make its best case for the reform measures and to apply them to real-life case studies provided to AllBusiness.com by small business owners.
We also asked small business owners to submit individual questions that addressed their particular concerns. Then, we asked Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the president’s office of health reform, to address these concerns. In an exclusive interview last week she made the administration’s case.
“We know that small businesses are worried, and they have every reason to be,” she said. “The status quo when it comes to health insurance is not working for small business.
“About one quarter of the uninsured, around 11 million people, are employed at firms with fewer than 25 workers,” she noted. “The number of firms offering insurance is declining, and those that do offer insurance pay about 20 percent more than large firms.”
One of the goals of reform, she said, is to lower costs for small firms. One of the main ways the legislation will do that is through the proposed insurance exchange, which will pool together small firms and increase their ability to negotiate better rates and lower administrative costs.
She added that the estimates she has seen show that some small businesses will be able to save as much as 25 percent on premiums when the bill is fully phased in.
“Most small businesses would be exempt from any requirement that they participate in this, because of size and relatively small payrolls,” she continued. “But those that do, we think should get lower costs; we think they will have more access to more choices and will have access to tax credits to help them afford it.”
Small business owners have been particularly concerned about how the reforms would affect their businesses. So, AllBusiness.com asked firms to submit profiles of their businesses and outline their experience with health insurance.
DeParle addressed two of these case studies directly in the interview, and will post the administration’s response to others on their Web site, which can be found here. AllBusiness.com will also post the information on its Web site.
Helen Dean is one of the cases. She owns a company called Toy Safari in Alameda, Calif., that has five full-time equivalent employees with salaries that average around $20,000 a year. She currently provides health insurance, which costs about $350 a month per employee. Her rates have gone up, on average, 7 percent per year, well ahead of inflation.
She has some workers who are over age 50, which is adding to her health insurance bill. She said that she has avoided hiring people because they would have needed health insurance.
“That’s something we really see a lot,” said DeParle. “There are small businesses out there that could grow, that have good ideas, or [there are] people who would like to start small businesses and they can’t just because of the cost of health insurance.”
First, DeParle said, under the new plan, Dean would have a tax credit to help her pay for insurance, although she wouldn’t be required to offer insurance because of the size of her firm. In the House bill, the credit would cover up to 50 percent of the cost. The Senate tax credit is less initially, but also would cover up to 50 percent once it is fully phased in after 2013.
Both the House and Senate bills would prevent insurance companies from charging higher rates based on health status, and limit the premium variation based on age. Dean could also get lower rates by purchasing insurance through the exchange with other small businesses, she said.
Finally, it should help her be more competitive in hiring workers. “She mentioned that high health insurance costs had prevented her from hiring new workers. Under reform, people will have access to high-quality, affordable coverage through the exchange, meaning that she’ll compete on a level playing field with other firms that offer benefits and attract and retain top, talented workers,” DeParle said.
In addition to preparing case studies, AllBusiness.com also solicited individual questions from business owners. Almost 100 business owners responded, and their concerns ranged from the cost of the overall program to how it would affect such programs as Medicare and Medicaid, and the quality of health care overall.
Steve Benish, of Magic Car Wash in Sheboygan, Wis., asked a question that was representative of a number of small business owners: What is this going to cost to me?
“I own a business with 16 employees, but with sales less than $500,000 a year, am I going to be required to purchase health care for my employees, which I cannot afford, and will I be penalized if I don’t?” he asked.
“For most small businesses, and I believe his certainly would qualify, there won’t be any employer responsibility or requirement,” said DeParle. “It’s really only when you get to a larger payroll and larger number of employees [that you will be required to offer a health plan.]”
Raju Jairam, of MBI Consulting in Fort Collins, Colo., asked: “I’m currently paying premiums for my health insurance. Will the health care reform increase the premiums I’m paying, and will my coverage increase or decrease?”
“First, if you have a health insurance plan that you think works for you, under these bills, it’s going to be what we call grandfathered, meaning that you can keep it,” DeParle said.
“The only change should be that over time your cost should be lowered as we do some of the delivery system reforms.
“The other good thing that just can’t be overemphasized is, let’s say you decided ‘I’m going to go start a small business,’ or you were laid off from your job,” she continued. “After reform, you will be able to go purchase insurance in the exchange and it will be more affordable to you. If you are low income, you’ll have access to subsidies.
“It will enable you to have that peace of mind,” she said. “Pretty much anybody over the age of 30 in this country right now, if you try to go into the individual market, you could have a good chance of being locked out, or find it difficult to purchase because of a pre-existing condition. This has happened in my family and may have happened in yours.
“That’s a benefit of this reform,” she said. “If you wanted to change, if you wanted to start a small business, you will be able to do that.”
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Health care reform would mean more costs for businesses
By Danielle Ulman
Business Writer
Daily Record - Baltimore
Kenneth R. Huber of PSA Insurance & Financial Services says there isn’t anything in either the House or Senate version of the health care reform bill that would ‘meaningfully improve care.’ Health insurance requirements could take a radical turn if a health care reform bill ever lands on President Barack Obama’s desk, and that could mean costly changes for businesses.
The House and Senate versions of the bill vary in several key areas, but both call for some sort of employer mandate, requiring certain business owners to provide health insurance to full-time employees, and would require individuals to have health insurance. Businesses and individuals that don’t follow the rules would pay fines for not having coverage.
“For many, many businesses, the employer mandate is going to mean new costs on the business, whether they take the fine or comply,” said Kenneth R. Huber, senior vice president of the employee benefit group for PSA Insurance & Financial Services in Hunt Valley.
“I look at the economy, and a lot of businesses have already trimmed their expenses, including employees. … They’re going to look at a new cost the same way all employers look at a new cost. They’re going to have to figure out how to deal with it,” said Huber, who advises small to medium-sized businesses.
Under the House bill, which passed in November, companies with annual payrolls of $500,000 or more would be required to offer employees health care coverage. Sanctions would begin at 2 percent of payroll expenses and ramp up to 8 percent if the business has a payroll of $750,000 or more.
Under the Senate bill, which has not been debated yet, employers would not have to provide coverage. However, if any employee received government assistance to buy an insurance plan, the company would have to pay a $750 penalty for each of its employees. Companies with fewer than 50 employees would be exempt.
Out of more than 119,000 businesses in Maryland, 74 percent have fewer than 50 full-time employees. But only 44 percent of those businesses offered health benefits in 2008, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
About 56,000 small businesses in Maryland could qualify for tax credits of up to 50 percent of a health insurance premium under health reform. Reform would expand on Maryland’s Health Insurance Partnership, which gives businesses with two to nine full-time employees the same subsidy if they have not offered insurance in the last year and their employees make less than $50,000 on average. Under reform, a business that employs up to 25 people, with average salaries of $40,000, would qualify for credits.
Reform would also provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. But the small-group plans offered in Maryland — for companies with 2 to 50 employees — already do that.
“Our concern is that Maryland already imposes more mandates on the small-group insurance,” said Kathleen Snyder, president and CEO of the Maryland Chamber of Commerce, which opposes the House health care bill.
“We’re concerned that Maryland will come back and add on to a very rich federal government plan, which will add up the costs to insurers [and] to employers,” she said.
Vincent DeMarco, president of the Maryland Citizens’ Health Initiative, said he is hopeful that health care reform will become a reality. His group has pushed for universal health care in Maryland through a 2 percent payroll tax on businesses.
“We would like to do our proposal the way the House did, which is to require all businesses provide health care and charge them an assessment if they don’t,” he said.
“If something like that passes, that would make it unnecessary for us to do many of the things we were going to do,” DeMarco said. “We’re ready to adapt our proposal to theirs to finish the job here in Maryland.”
He said that requiring all businesses to provide health care would decrease the hidden costs in premiums that cover the uninsured. But both Huber and Snyder said they are unsure if health care reform would actually bring costs down.
“At the end of the day, both of these bills are primarily health insurance reforms and expanding coverage, and there isn’t a lot that I believe will meaningfully have any impact on bending the cost curve,” Huber said. “Nor is there anything in either of these bills that will meaningfully improve care.”
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Small firms scrapping, scaling back health plans
By DAVID A. LIEB
Associated Press
Faced with high health insurance costs, a North Carolina brokerage passed the buck on to its employees, a Texas public relations firm switched from group insurance to stipends, and a Missouri travel agency let its workers walk away instead paying for insurance.
Across the country, businesses already strapped by the economy to turn a profit are sacrificing or scaling back employee health insurance plans because of their escalating costs. The crunch has particularly socked smaller employers, who have become a centerpiece in the debate over how to overhaul the nation's health care system.
In recent weeks, small business owners have pleaded their case to the White House and Congress. Top Democrats in both the House and Senate have announced probes into how health insurers price their policies for small businesses. And lawmakers have proposed a variety of insurance rating changes, mandates and tax breaks to try to control costs.
That comes against a backdrop of some stark statistics:
_ Small businesses are paying an average 18 percent more than the largest firms for comparable health insurance policies, according to a study financed by the Commonwealth Fund.
_ Many small businesses are facing double-digit rate increases for insurance coverage this fall. Insurers are requesting small group rate hikes of 10-15 percent in Ohio, an average of 15-16 percent in Maryland and as much as 20 percent in Washington state, according to an informal survey by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
_ The number of businesses with three to nine employees that offer health insurance has shrunk from 58 percent in 2002 to 46 percent this year, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
"There's no way that (small businesses) can go another 10 years like the last 10 years," said James Gelfand, senior manager of health policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Small companies lack the leverage of their bigger counterparts to negotiate with insurers. So when health insurance rates rise, they often look for a new insurer — a time-consuming task for firms that lack a human resources department. Many small businesses seek to soften rate hikes by asking employees to make higher co-payments, offering high-deductible plans, switching to less generous benefits or simply dropping their coverage.
Cooper Smith tried each of those options over the past several years while straining to offer health benefits at his four-person public relations firm in Dallas. He dropped dental coverage, doubled the employees' yearly health care deductible from $1,500 to $3,000 and raised co-payments for doctor visits and prescription drugs.
"Every year I just saw it go up and up and up, like 18 to 20 percent, and every year we did what everyone does — we tried to figure out ways to get the cost of the plan down," Smith said.
Finally, Smith's firm decided to drop its group health insurance plan in favor of a $125 per month stipend that each employee can put toward an individual insurance policy. Smith was surprised to discover that insurers wouldn't sell him an individual plan because of a diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis. So he now pays about $425 a month for a $5,000 deductible policy through Texas' high risk insurance pool.
About three-fourths of states allow insurers to vary their standard rates by demographics such as age and gender, geography, industry and the cumulative health status of the people covered in the group. A small business with more older workers or women of childbearing age is likely to pay more than one composed mainly of young males. Employees with pre-existing health conditions or an unexpected big medical expense also drive up premiums for a small group, making it hard for small business owners to plan for their health care costs from year to year.
Classic Travel Tours & Tanning in Jefferson City, Mo., sought to provide health insurance when one of its fewer than a half-dozen employees developed breast cancer, said owner Linda Bax. But there weren't enough other employees wanting to purchase a policy for the company to be able to afford it. Eventually, the employee with cancer quit.
"We've had some great employees who have had to leave" for other jobs, Bax said. "Even though they took a cut in pay to go someplace else ... it provided them the benefits they needed."
Proposals in Congress would prohibit the insurance industry from adjusting rates based on the health of employees, though some variation for age would still be allowed. Small businesses also could more easily shop for policies through a new health insurance exchange.
Both the House and Senate versions would offer temporary tax credits to offset a portion of the health insurance costs for businesses with fewer than 25 employees and average wages of less than $40,000.
Those provisions could make health insurance more affordable for small businesses currently priced out of the market. But others not now offering health insurance could find themselves forced to do so.
Legislation passed by the House would impose a tax penalty on businesses with payrolls of more than $500,000 that don't offer health insurance or fail to pay at least 72.5 percent of the premium costs for a health plan with federally mandated benefits.
The National Federation of Independent Business estimates that payroll threshold would get triggered for businesses with about 17 employees. The group lists the mandate to offer insurance and the corresponding tax penalty as its top two reasons for opposing the legislation.
"It's a roadblock to job growth," said NFIB tax counsel Bill Rys. For a business near that payroll threshold, "the cost of adding one or two workers isn't just the cost of hiring the employee, it's the cost of complying with the mandate."
Ashley Ascott, whose 12-person brokerage firm sells commercial, home and car insurance, says her Morrisville, N.C., company faces the same financial pressures her customers are facing. She's laid off one employee, cut another to part-time and has two people working four-day weeks.
Yet her insurance company still is struggling to provide its workers health coverage.
Last year, the company paid 60 percent of the health insurance premiums. This year, Ascott switched to a flat $100 monthly contribution, amounting to about 40 percent of the cost for an individual plan and less for family coverage.
"We still need to provide it, but we just couldn't keep paying the 60 percent," she said.
