His idea is to tax the insurance companies on the revenue for their most expensive plans. This will surely get passed onto the consumers. It will likely even get passed onto the consumers who do not have that insurers most expensive plan. An indirect tax is still a tax.
Arizona Senator John Kyl must not understand the concept of contradicting himself.
“There’s very little evidence the tax on the insurer would have an impact on the insured’s behavior, which is the whole point,” Arizona Senator Jon Kyl said. “Secondly, it’s a tax on employment since it clearly would be passed on to employees.”His first point is completely naive and probably inaccurate. His second comment is pretty accurate and makes my point while contradicting his first statement.
Employees who found it easy to elect for the top end PPO coverage through their employer will be faced with a tough descision when it comes time between shouldering the cost of good coverage versus making a cut in some other aspect of their family lives. The difference between PPO and the lower end POS & HMO plans is significant. There is a reason I have opted for the better coverage at every job I have ever had. Making health care something other than a dollars an cents descision is exactly what Obama is trying to do for the uninsured, but at the same time, he's just shifting the constituancy who has to make that descision. I will have to have less so someone else can have more. Its one thing when we are talking vacations, cars and big screen TVs. Its entirely different when when we are talking about healthcare.
Obama’s era will be recalled as the era of the indirect tax.