[lordofduct]

That's not written into the law. It doesn't say that in the law. The law could maybe be interpreted as such, but that is up to a court to actually determine if said interpretation is accurate.

[farrell2k]

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Again, I already stated that I was not asked about this, and only found out about the "loophole" to charge me more after a phone call with my insurance broker. Also, there are a lot of pre-existing conditions, or did you mistype and mean "no preexisting condition questions?"

Apparently now Healthcare.gov is so screwed up, that the insurers are once again allowed to charge you more or deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition...

[aidenkael]

lordofduct, on 30 October 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

It's still hearsay, because she told you something not related to the law. The law actually says the complete opposite. That means she told you something of her own determination, and thusly hearsay.

Also the statement about your quotes was because you haven't clarified where you got your quotes from yet. You describe things two ways frequently, I thought this was a private broker, not a representative of the exchange.


Note, I'm not saying you're lying. But what you've said is difficult to follow.

I'll try to clarify a bit. First I went on the exchange, searched around and saw the prices etc. Because I was confused on if I was covered under certain plans, I called my private broker. She is certified (as all insurance brokers now have to be) as an Exchange and ACA expert. That is where I learned of the loopholes to charge me more.

[lordofduct]

But that does not explain the high prices in the first place.

Hence the confusion.

Was the 700+ dollars found on the exchange, and was the reason given to you for it this loophole? That doesn't logically make sense, but the way you worded it, that's the way it sounds.

[aidenkael]

farrell2k, on 30 October 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Again, I already stated that I was not asked about this, and only found out about the "loophole" to charge me more after a phone call with my insurance broker. Also, there are a lot of pre-existing conditions, or did you mistype and mean "no preexisting condition questions?"

Apparently now Healthcare.gov is so screwed up, that the insurers are once again allowed to charge you more or deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition...

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the whole law? If insurance companies can once again deny us coverage, what did the law accomplish? Higher rates for everybody and more headaches?

[lordofduct]

You could have found the 700+, and the 1600 on the exchange. That doesn't surprise me. I just don't think your condition has anything to do with it since the exchange doesn't ask for your pre-existing condition, so it doesn't effect the price. Furthermore you haven't received the insurance yet, so it wasn't jacked up yet.

Does it defeat the law, it depends on if that's the way the insurance company interprets the law. And if an insurance company does interpret it as such and is brought to court over it, it's up to a judge to determine if their interpretation was accurate.

Because the law doesn't say that explicitly.

But I bet the law could possibly be interpreted like that. I'm not a lawyer, I can't say for sure.

This post has been edited by lordofduct: 30 October 2013 - 09:40 AM

[aidenkael]

lordofduct, on 30 October 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:

But that does not explain the high prices in the first place.

Hence the confusion.

Was the 700+ dollars found on the exchange, and was the reason given to you for it this loophole? That doesn't logically make sense, but the way you worded it, that's the way it sounds.

The high price is a combination of my age (21) my income (+55k a year) and the fact that I am self employed. I qualify for no deductions or subsidies.

The 700+ was found on the exchange. There are plans that are less, but they provide no real coverage for me, so they aren't really realistic to buy.

Side note, being a business owner I am going to see if I can write of my own healthcare as a "business expense"...... Doubt it......

[supersloth]

probably not since it's PERSONAL HEALTHCARE.

[aidenkael]

lordofduct, on 30 October 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

You could have found the 700+, and the 1600 on the exchange. That doesn't surprise me. I just don't think your condition has anything to do with it since the exchange doesn't ask for your pre-existing condition, so it doesn't effect the price. Furthermore you haven't received the insurance yet, so it wasn't jacked up yet.

Does it defeat the law, it depends on if that's the way the insurance company interprets the law. And if an insurance company does interpret it as such and is brought to court over it, it's up to a judge to determine if their interpretation was accurate.

Because the law doesn't say that explicitly.

But I bet the law could possibly be interpreted like that. I'm not a lawyer, I can't say for sure.

Correct the 700 is on the exchange. I have have two choices:

Option 1:
Buy Medicaid at $700+, stop recieving treatment for Marfans and hope my heart holds up.

Option 1a:
Buy Medicaid, go to the doctor, pay a couple grand out of pocket everytime and hope my rates don't go up too badly.

Option 2:
Buy the plan at $1600+ that does cover me and possibly sell my car.

I'm between a rock and a hard place thanks to ACA.

[lordofduct]

Oh and also, as far as I can tell, private insurance brokers aren't required to be certified representative of the ACA and the exchange. They can be, and if your broker says they are, they probably are (it's probably against the law to some degree to say your are if you aren't).

And being a certified representative doesn't necessarily make them experts. The freaking website barely works, I'd be suspect of the training program as well. I've met "certified" all sorts of things, and it usually means they went to a few hour course on the matter and have a booklet on hand to assist in answering questions. And it certainly doesn't mean that the representative is free of bias (in any direction).

[farrell2k]

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Side note, being a business owner I am going to see if I can write of my own healthcare as a "business expense"...... Doubt it......

All health-related expenses have always been 100% tax deductible. I have been doing it for years...

There are also no pre-existing conditions for Medicaid. Where is God's name are you getting your information???

This post has been edited by farrell2k: 30 October 2013 - 09:45 AM

[lordofduct]

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

lordofduct, on 30 October 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

You could have found the 700+, and the 1600 on the exchange. That doesn't surprise me. I just don't think your condition has anything to do with it since the exchange doesn't ask for your pre-existing condition, so it doesn't effect the price. Furthermore you haven't received the insurance yet, so it wasn't jacked up yet.

Does it defeat the law, it depends on if that's the way the insurance company interprets the law. And if an insurance company does interpret it as such and is brought to court over it, it's up to a judge to determine if their interpretation was accurate.

Because the law doesn't say that explicitly.

But I bet the law could possibly be interpreted like that. I'm not a lawyer, I can't say for sure.

Correct the 700 is on the exchange. I have have two choices:

Option 1:
Buy Medicaid at $700+, stop recieving treatment for Marfans and hope my heart holds up.

Option 1a:
Buy Medicaid, go to the doctor, pay a couple grand out of pocket everytime and hope my rates don't go up too badly.

Option 2:
Buy the plan at $1600+ that does cover me and possibly sell my car.

I'm between a rock and a hard place thanks to ACA.

That sucks.

Thank you for clearing up what you were saying.

[aidenkael]

farrell2k, on 30 October 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Side note, being a business owner I am going to see if I can write of my own healthcare as a "business expense"...... Doubt it......

All health-related expenses have always been 100% tax deductible. I have been doing it for years...

dangole-man-you-telling-me-i-could-a-been-written-stuff-off-and-i-didn't-even-know-it-shoot-man-im-callin-my-accountant-son-of-a *walks away*

lordofduct, on 30 October 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

lordofduct, on 30 October 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

You could have found the 700+, and the 1600 on the exchange. That doesn't surprise me. I just don't think your condition has anything to do with it since the exchange doesn't ask for your pre-existing condition, so it doesn't effect the price. Furthermore you haven't received the insurance yet, so it wasn't jacked up yet.

Does it defeat the law, it depends on if that's the way the insurance company interprets the law. And if an insurance company does interpret it as such and is brought to court over it, it's up to a judge to determine if their interpretation was accurate.

Because the law doesn't say that explicitly.

But I bet the law could possibly be interpreted like that. I'm not a lawyer, I can't say for sure.

Correct the 700 is on the exchange. I have have two choices:

Option 1:
Buy Medicaid at $700+, stop recieving treatment for Marfans and hope my heart holds up.

Option 1a:
Buy Medicaid, go to the doctor, pay a couple grand out of pocket everytime and hope my rates don't go up too badly.

Option 2:
Buy the plan at $1600+ that does cover me and possibly sell my car.

I'm between a rock and a hard place thanks to ACA.

That sucks.

Thank you for clearing up what you were saying.

No problem It's easier after two cups of coffee

[supersloth]

farrell2k, on 30 October 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Side note, being a business owner I am going to see if I can write of my own healthcare as a "business expense"...... Doubt it......

All health-related expenses have always been 100% tax deductible. I have been doing it for years...

There are also no pre-existing conditions for Medicaid. Where is God's name are you getting your information???

yeah but personal healthcare gets deducted on personal taxes. as far as i know it can't be deducted as a business expense like aiden said he wanted to try.

This post has been edited by supersloth: 30 October 2013 - 09:50 AM

[farrell2k]

supersloth, on 30 October 2013 - 04:50 PM, said:

farrell2k, on 30 October 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

aidenkael, on 30 October 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Side note, being a business owner I am going to see if I can write of my own healthcare as a "business expense"...... Doubt it......

All health-related expenses have always been 100% tax deductible. I have been doing it for years...

There are also no pre-existing conditions for Medicaid. Where is God's name are you getting your information???

yeah but personal healthcare gets deducted on personal taxes. as far as i know it can't be deducted as a business expense like aiden said he wanted to try.

That depends on business status. A sole proprietor deducts everything on his or her personal taxes, regardless. If a different status is used for the business it would depend on whether the business pays for the benefits as an expense. Either way he will be able to deduct it. Hopefully he gets to do it somewhere where it lowers his tax backet.