topic Re: Question re. email from Covered CA in Community Chat

Question re. email from Covered CA

Say Nay — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 19:12:43 GMT

I have a question about an email I received from Covered CA which is my state's implementation of ACA. Because my BC of CA plan was terminated I signed up for a new plan through Covered CA because they were slightly less/mo than what I was quoted through other providers' plans.

Now Covered CA wants me to give them access to my income tax statements so they can check my income to renew me for coverage. If I do not opt in my current plan, if still available for 2015, will be renewed without any tax credit and out of pocket cost sharing assistance. They are encouraging me to opt in for 5 years.

There is nothing in writing that limits the extent which Covered CA will delve into IRS statements to verify income. I'm wondering if they also review items on taxes that could possibly reveal more than just income. For example business deductions for travel. Travel is stressful and stress is a contributor to poor health.

I understand Covered CA is the marketplace for insurance. But can the information from the IRS be gathered by Covered CA and turned over to health care providers or would that be illegal?

TIA

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

Tyak — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 20:36:42 GMT

Do you think that they're concerned about the illegality of anything they do? I don't.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

MaggieToo — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 20:38:54 GMT

I think there is more to the ACA than meets the eye. Big Brother comes to mind.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

ahoymate — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 20:39:18 GMT

Talk with a healthcare lawyer. U sound paranoid.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

Say Nay — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 20:42:59 GMT

On 10/10/2014 Skylands said:
Talk with a healthcare lawyer. U sound paranoid.

This isn't something to contact a healthcare lawyer for. And so what if I sound paranoid.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

missy1 — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 20:57:02 GMT

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

terrier3 — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 20:59:46 GMT

On 10/10/2014 MaggieToo said:
I think there is more to the ACA than meets the eye. Big Brother comes to mind.

In order to get tax credits and cost share reductions, you must have income within a certain range.

You need to present a LOT more information to a bank to get a mortgage. The bank wants income tax returns, pay stubs, savings, 401ks, pensions, your debts, your average monthly expenses etc. They practically move in with you...they want to know everything.

NO ONE NEEDS to list income to get individual health insurance. You just won't get the premium tax credit or other reductions that are available through the exchange. You can get the very same policies directly through an insurer. You used to be asked many questions by insurance companies before they would decide to cover you with a policy. They could ask your height, weight, smoker or non-smoker, pre-existing conditions, etc. If you weren't healthy enough, they could refuse to cover you...or charge you more. Now they can only ask your age and if you smoke. End of story. Everyone gets covered.

It's LESS information...not more.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

PAX — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:00:06 GMT

Verifying income is a fraud prevention action.

See Terrior's post above.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

terrier3 — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:01:45 GMT

On 10/10/2014 Georgie the 5th said:
Verifying income is a fraud prevention action.

You tell them upfront when you sign up for the insurance what you anticipated your income would be in 2014.

They are now auditing to make sure that number is correct.

If your income goes up or down, you are asked to call the exchange and update your information.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

PAX — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:04:31 GMT

On 10/10/2014 terrier3 said:
On 10/10/2014 Georgie the 5th said:
Verifying income is a fraud prevention action.

You tell them upfront when you sign up for the insurance what you anticipated your income would be in 2014.

They are now auditing to make sure that number is correct.

If your income goes up or down, you are asked to call the exchange and update your information.

I read it to also prevent someone making (for example) $5 million/yr from benefitting from the same rate as someone making $50,000/yr.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

terrier3 — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:08:46 GMT

On 10/10/2014 Georgie the 5th said:
On 10/10/2014 terrier3 said:
On 10/10/2014 Georgie the 5th said:
Verifying income is a fraud prevention action.

You tell them upfront when you sign up for the insurance what you anticipated your income would be in 2014.

They are now auditing to make sure that number is correct.

If your income goes up or down, you are asked to call the exchange and update your information.

I read it to also prevent someone making (for example) $5 million/yr from benefitting from the same rate as someone making $50,000/yr.

Absolutely.

You read correctly!

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

minkbunny — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:18:34 GMT

If I understood correctly the other night, the ACA does not ask about assets but merely income. So a very wealthy person with a lot of assets but little or no income could still qualify. Is that right?

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

moonstone dunes — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:24:06 GMT

Yes, they (Exchange) can call or email you for supporting documentation throughout the benefit year. My exchange account for 2014 was established online so the only emails I got were notices to check my online account. When I logged in I would find letters requesting updated information including tax information, requests from HHS regarding changes, etc. For 2015 it seems the tax documentation is requested upfront. My only .02 is to avoid having an automatic premium deduction from your bank account.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

PAX — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:24:42 GMT

On 10/10/2014 minkbunny said:
If I understood correctly the other night, the ACA does not ask about assets but merely income. So a very wealthy person with a lot of assets but little or no income could still qualify. Is that right?

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/features/insuring-your-health/2013/070213-michelle-andrews-answers-readers-questions-on-assets-and-student-health-plans.aspx

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

minkbunny — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:29:41 GMT

Thank you Georgie for the link -

from the article

Assets would not be counted, except for any income that's generated from the assets," says Mark Luscombe, a principal federal tax analyst at CCH, a tax and business information publisher.

So, if a person (such as the one in the article had a large stock portfolio that was not generating more income than the allocated limits, they would qualify). Much as if one owned lots and lots of land or had a lot of gems in the safe or gold or silver bars laying around.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

PAX — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:33:27 GMT

On 10/10/2014 minkbunny said:
Thank you Georgie for the link -

from the article

Assets would not be counted, except for any income that's generated from the assets," says Mark Luscombe, a principal federal tax analyst at CCH, a tax and business information publisher.

So, if a person (such as the one in the article had a large stock portfolio that was not generating more income than the allocated limits, they would qualify). Much as if one owned lots and lots of land or had a lot of gems in the safe or gold or silver bars laying around.

Or if someone owned a house and a car but had limited to no income, that person would not have to sell their assets. Can you imagine the outrage?

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

minkbunny — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:36:25 GMT

On 10/10/2014 Georgie the 5th said:
On 10/10/2014 minkbunny said:
Thank you Georgie for the link -

from the article

Assets would not be counted, except for any income that's generated from the assets," says Mark Luscombe, a principal federal tax analyst at CCH, a tax and business information publisher.

So, if a person (such as the one in the article had a large stock portfolio that was not generating more income than the allocated limits, they would qualify). Much as if one owned lots and lots of land or had a lot of gems in the safe or gold or silver bars laying around.

Or if someone owned a house and a car but had limited to no income, that person would not have to sell their assets. Can you imagine the outrage?

If those who need the subsidies are being helped, I am very happy for them. To have no insurance would be very scary to me. I just wanted clarification. I actually do know a lot of people who would be very wealthy if they sold off their assets, without doing so their income is rather limited. Thanks again.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

terrier3 — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:26:12 GMT

On 10/10/2014 minkbunny said:
If I understood correctly the other night, the ACA does not ask about assets but merely income. So a very wealthy person with a lot of assets but little or no income could still qualify. Is that right?

Yes.

Just as wealthy people can also collect unemployment insurance.

The only test is how much do you expect to claim as income on your federal taxes in 2015. You can keep your house, your summer house, your car, your stock portfolio, etc. and get a tax credit if you will be claiming less than 400% of the federal poverty level based on the size of your household.

I don't think that many wealthy people will quit working to get a break on their insurance. If a wealthy single person is living off savings from a savings account and has less than $11,000 (approx.) in income on their taxes...they will automatically be assigned to Medicaid.

Do you know many wealthy people who want to be on Medicaid? I don't.

Another example - A stockbroker usually earns $100,000 in a year but is fired from his job in June. He had made $50,000 that year to date and doesn't know if he will be back to work within that year. He can refuse COBRA and within 60 days from firing, he can apply and receive insurance through the exchange. $50,000 a year for a family of 4 would entitle him to a tax credit to help with his premiums. If he gets another job within that year, he must inform the exchange and let them know what his wages are. His credit will be adjusted (or may entirely disappear). If he doesn't let the exchange know...he will just have to pay back the credit on his taxes at the end of the year.

Logically speaking - people don't quit working or generating income (rental income is included as income) to get a break on insurance.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

minkbunny — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:27:38 GMT

I don't anybody, wealthy or poor, who wants to be on Medicaid.

Re: Question re. email from Covered CA

terrier3 — Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:30:04 GMT

On 10/10/2014 minkbunny said:
I don't anybody, wealthy or poor, who wants to be on Medicaid.

Very good point!

I think the idea is that you shouldn't have to sell off everything you worked for and saved for all your life if you find yourself w/o insurance and with limited income.