Quote:
Question - how does this become cost neutral to the Gov't with the massive tax write-offs? I don't understand it, but I don't dispute the CBO.
This is just a guess, I apologize if I am way off base, it's based somewhat on the situation in Canada.
With employer funded health insurance now, the employers get a deduction for the premiums that are paid; however, benefits are taxable as against the end user (the employee).
By moving the focus from the employer to the employee, the costs are not 'hidden' as part of general benefits paid by the employer, and the employee gets the deduction instead.
If premiums stay the same in the aggregate (including decreasing, but covering more people), then the only difference would be moving the deductibility from the mployer to the employee which could (*might*) be tax neutral.
_________________________
You're all still alive?
Previous Topic
Index
