








since you're in texas you don't have to pay a fine. your state opted out of rhe ACA.
^^^ actually, no state was allowed to 'opt out' of the federal Affordable Care Act. What some states WERE allowed to do by the US Supreme Court is to decide they would not commit the state funds necessary to implement Expanded Medicaid, and to decide that they would not commit the state funds necessary to implement a state-run public health insurance exchange ( which forced the public health exchanges established in those states to be federally run not state run ).
Since the new IRS penalty tax is federal, Americans living in ANY state must pay that new IRS penalty if they choose not to purchase 'qualified' health insurance coverage for themselves ... if such coverage was available at an 'affordable' price. The ACA supposedly establishes 'affordable' to be insurance premiums which ( net of taxpayer subsidies ) do not cost more than 8% of the person's gross income. Thus even Americans who are living in states which did not commit state funding to state run exchanges and/or to Expanded Medicaid will still have to pay the new IRS penalty ... unless their gross incomes are small enough to fall below 133% of the Federal poverty level thus making them ineligible to purchase public health exchange insurance. For a single person without children 133% of FPL is somewhere around $14,000 per year.
I will add that, for Americans residing in states which chose not to offer Expanded Medicaid and who 'forced' the federal gov't to set up the public health insurance exchange in their states, there is a lawsuit on the federal court docket which could potentially change this situation greatly. That lawsuit contends that the specific wording of the ACA law does not authorize the IRS to pay out taxpayer funded subsidies for public health exchange based health insurance policies. If this lawsuit is successful, then in states which chose not to offer Expanded Medicaid and who 'forced' the federal gov't to set up the public health exchange, state residents earning $150,000 per year or $40,000 per year or $15,000 per year would all wind up having to pay the same unsubsidized monthly premium cost ( which is likely to be in the $200 per month ballpark at minimum in the absence of taxpayer subsidies ).
If that turns out to be the case after a future court ruling, then some state residents would fall under the 8% 'affordable' insurance exception ... thus would not be required to pay the new IRS penalty tax if, and only if, 12*$200 per month ( i.e. lowest available ) unsubsidized insurance premium cost exceeds 8% of their gross income. So depending on this future court ruling, as well as on the lowest available ( unsubsidized ) public health exchange health insurance premium cost, this may wind up allowing residents of these states who earn less than ~$30k per year to avoid having to pay the new IRS penalty tax based on the 8% 'affordability' exception. But those residents of these states whose incomes will exceed that 8% calculation ( ballpark $30k per year ) will STILL have to pay the new IRS penalty tax if they choose not to purchase health insurance, regardless of how the future court decision actually comes down. And, obviously, future executive action or 'repair' legislation could cause this lawsuit to 'disappear' by confirming IRS authority to pay out taxpayer funded insurance premium subsidy money to ALL Americans earning less than 400% of the FPL ( = about $46,000 per year for a single person with no children ).
Thus, regardless of what state you live in, unless your earnings level is below the 133% of FPL = $14,000 per year eligibility level for public health exchange insurance purchases, you'd better plan on paying 1%, 2% and 2.5% of your gross income for this new IRS penalty tax in 2014, 2015, and 2016+ respectively, if you don't purchase 'qualified' health insurance coverage and opt to pay 'cash' for medical treatments .
Last edited by Melonie; 01-12-2014 at 06:10 AM. Reason: n
Bookmarks