- Thread starter
- #21
Breaking News - Employer Group Mandates Delayed 1 Year
- Thread starter Yagents
- Start date
I just heard it on NBC nightly news, and it made me think of a question. I keep hearing that they delayed the penalty for large groups that DO NOT HAVE insurance. That's the first penalty (the $2,000 penalty for every full-time employee, less the first 30). How about the 2nd penalty for large groups that HAVE insurance, but it's not minimum value or affordable? That's the $3,000 penalty for every full-time employee who gets a subsidy in the exchange, less the first 30. Did they delay the first penalty and not the second one? I'm not saying I know the answer, but if in fact they only delayed one penalty, then I can hear big whooshing sound of large group health plans going away.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Yes. Most large employers don't do this. It's smaller, family held companies that do this. However, one segment of large employers who may carve-out is the labor-intensive groups like restaurants, hotels, landscapers, staffing companies, etc.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Yes. Most large employers don't do this. It's smaller, family held companies that do this. However, one segment of large employers who may carve-out is the labor-intensive groups like restaurants, hotels, landscapers, staffing companies, etc.
Last edited:
- 483
With no penalty, I would assume business owners that haven't made adjustments will operate as usual for another year. But I would be PO'd if I modified my staff to comply only to hear "Nevermind."
- 2,960
Hey, Chumps from Oxford if you read this thread. Does this remind you of an early Seinfeld episode?
Levels, Jerry, levels ... No, I'm not doing the levels anymore.
Levels, Jerry, levels ... No, I'm not doing the levels anymore.
- 10,276
Just saw this thread and yep...was that the one with Kramer and the levels in his apartment?
Crazy stuff.
Crazy stuff.
- 748
Strange timing for this announcement, what with Barry in Africa and the midterm elections on the horizon.
- 2,960
Yes, lol ...........
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Washington don't know their a$$ from a hole in the ground.
Last edited:
- 1,896
Unless I'm mistaken, the $3,000 penalty doesn't carve out the first 30. It's only when someone receives a subsidy and coverage doesn't meet the affordability or MV standards.
Right?
My mind is numb. I can't think. Does it or doesn't it carve out the first 30. Literally, I am stunned and can't think. It's time like this I wish I was a drinker and could just order some hard stuff!
At the same time I don't think businesses are going to open the hiring flood gates like many are hoping for. Why would an employer go through the expense and time to hire new workers just to have to deal with this mess in another year? Businesses have been cutting hours and openings since this bill was passed and won't be replacing anyone just because of the delay.
I also don't see this as a big election swing in 2014. Sure, businesses won't feel the actual pain of paying penalties, but they will be facing the pain in under 60 days come election time. Unless this provision gets completely repealed, business will be facing this penalty sooner or later and business owners are smart enough to project pain.
Similar threads
