<p>Thinking the same thing as cf, how can that possibly be legal? Sure, they did it… But it seems they’d have to give more notice than that.</p>
<p>Here’s what I think it is: there’s dependent. Then there is dependent for the purpose of the IRS exemptions we list on our tax returns. </p>
<p>I always thought of “dependent” in those IRS tax return terms- you provide more than half their costs. I now see the IRS starts with dependent simply defined based on the relationship- son, daughter, etc. Easy. They state clearly that ACA does not change that definition. </p>
<p>I may have been confused by something else- which I will skip, for now.</p>
<p>Federal law requires 90 days notice of cancellation so I don’t know how the company can get away with this.</p>
<p>Anthem was required to give a 2 month extension, based on cases where they informed late. The neighbor may be able to pursue this.</p>
<p>I have a feeling that somehow a previous letter or letters went astray, because cancelling with one day notice is so obviously improper that I can’t see why an insurance company would try it.</p>
<p>People move, addresses change. </p>
<p>My bank will not let me change my phone number online in profile, even though we haven’t had that number in years. I always forgot about it, and it is probably not a huge deal. </p>
<p>Mail is not delivered. Damaged in mail. Mail carrier dropped it at your crazy next door neighbors, and he will never, ever give it to you.;)</p>
<p>You got a letter in mail and thought it was junk mail and tossed it. </p>
<p>Once my son had a college admission package never actually arrive although it was allegedly sent. Five years later, still waiting on it.</p>
<p>I’m guessing there was something in the back of an earlier bill. I never read that pile of stuff behind the statement.</p>
<p>Thanks for all the input everyone. So, they have decided to let the insurance company roll them over into the plan they selected for them. It’s $120 more per month, higher deductible, higher co-pays. Her feeling is it’s not exactly more “affordable” but could be worse. And, next year they expect everything changes again anyway when H gets dumped by employer. That was some quick deciding. I’m impressed.</p>
<p>Sax, re
[quote]
Hi folks. </p>
<p>Can you confirm something for me?</p>
<p>$20,000 gross salary</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Kid can choose any color plan and get a subsidy towards PREMIUM cost.</p></li>
<li><p>Kid can ONLY choose silver if she wants a subsidy on out of pocket costs?</p></li>
<li><p>The MAXIUM out of pocket cost is only subsidized if you choose silver.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I especially want a confirm on #2. As I totally missed that or forgot it while reading the thread. [/
[quote]
</p>
<p>My information from BCBS Michigan for that exact scenario is YES on those counts. Major, major advantage to silver is the copay and OOP reduction. In this case at less than 200% of poverty line it will either be a 94 plan with $175 deductible and $300 OOP max or 87 plan with $300 deductible and 1400 OOP max.</p>
<p>So go silver. Cost sharing of ded and OOP is not avail with any other plans.</p>
<p>Ok… I switched my Anthem Blue Cross plan on dec 2 from the computerized choice. Was supposed to get confirmation. Never did. Called Anthem an additional 3 times. Anthem said during the calls the plan was switched and I will receive notification or the plan wasnt approved. Or whatever…</p>
<p>Found out today. Anthem never switched the computerized plan to the one I wanted.
A little annoying. ;)</p>
<p>Now… I have a confirmation number and some other number. Not the account number though.</p>
<p>Because it is late in the month… I will probably receive a bill for the wrong plan. It will have to be reconciled in Feb.</p>
<p>I think the guy I talked to today had some knowledge.
I will have to call Anthem again in several weeks. :)</p>
<p>I find this story interesting.</p>
<p>[What</a> the New Health Insurance Law Means for My Workers - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/boss/2013/12/16/what-the-new-health-insurance-law-means-for-my-workers/?partner=yahoofinance]What”>http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/boss/2013/12/16/what-the-new-health-insurance-law-means-for-my-workers/?partner=yahoofinance)</p>
<p>Interesting article, dstark. </p>
<p>I fear that the idea of reducing overall health care costs in a meaningful way by co-pays and co-insurance will not work. Once a person is over the out-of-pocket limit, any incentive to do cost comparisons goes out the window. And most health care costs are incurred by people who are over any out-of-pocket limit. Moreover, people who are within their out of pocket limit at the beginning of the year, but who know they will exceed it by the end of the year, won’t bother to do any comparison shopping.</p>
<p>Therefore, not much health care cost will be subject to scrutiny by people trying to reduce their out of pocket costs.</p>
<p>Interesting. I think some people will pay attention to costs at first…and then I agree… The incentive is gone.</p>
<p>My daughter and I talked about why the costs of self insuring and stop loss coverage did not equal the cost of using an insurance company. She mentioned locations of providers and different contracts with providers as big issues. </p>
<p>For example, Kaiser may have the best rates, but most of the employees may not live near a Kaiser.</p>
<p>The insurance companies and stop loss companies are given every claim so they can come up with bids.</p>
<p>DSTARK, Thanks for posting that article. His series has been quite enlightening. </p>
<p>Since a few days ago there were some posts on how enrollment is going - here is the latest from NY. Interesting that many more people are signing up for private plans versus Medicaid in NYS. Completely opposite than what is happening in the other states which agreed to the expansion. </p>
<p>“With one week left to enroll in health insurance plans that provide coverage on Jan. 1, the state’s health exchange saw another big increase in enrollment as of Monday morning — to almost 135,000, up 33 percent from the week before. The biggest spike was in private insurance plans, a rise of about 37 percent from the previous week, to just over 95,000. Medicaid enrollment rose about 26 percent, from about 31,000 to almost 40,000.”</p>
<p>[Capitol</a> Confidential » Enrollment rises on state Obamacare site, led by private plans](<a href=“http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/201416/enrollment-rises-on-state-obamacare-site-led-by-private-plans/]Capitol”>Enrollment rises on state Obamacare site, led by private plans - Capitol Confidential)</p>
<p>Emilybee, keep posting those links. I miss some of the articles. I want to keep up with this guy.</p>
<p>It is a little early but it looks to me like NY and Cal are going to reach their goals this year or at least meet their 3 year goals. </p>
<p>Texas and Florida are other states with large uninsured populations. I am not as sanguine about the prospects in those states. </p>
<p>Of course, by Texas and Florida opting out of the medicaid expansion, that makes ACA more financially viable. Kind of a weird turn of events.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Medicaid expansion shifts some care that was not reimbursed into care that is reimbursed. For that reason, the ACA lowered the federal payments to hospitals for unreimbursed care. Now Texas and Florida are on the hook for that care, and it will cost those states billions of dollars. </p>
<p>At the same time, Texas and Florida taxpayers are paying for the Medicaid expansion in California, New York, Illinois, and the other states that expanded.</p>
<p>“I miss some of the articles. I want to keep up with this guy.”</p>
<p>No problem. I read the NYT every day. I would have posted today’s article but you beat me to it!</p>
<p>People considering signing up for Medicaid should strongly consider just getting subsidies if they’re older, particularly if they have some assets. Apparently with the expanded Medicaid, came the governments right to reclaim expenses from people’s estates. Bummer if you had a house you wanted to pass on to a loved one. It is not the great freebie it appears.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They can’t. You can’t get subsidies if you qualify for Medicaid**.</p>
<p>** Nominally there is some overlap, between 100% of the poverty line and 138% of the poverty line: those people are supposed to be eligible both for subsidies and for Medicaid. But in practice, expansion states are not letting people lower than 138% of the poverty line get subsidies. I believe Romani discovered this when she tried to apply for subsidies.</p>
<p>I meant older as in forties, fifties, early sixties, when people are hopefully building up assets. Would be worth rearranging or building income, however one can do it to avoid Medicaid, to get a subsidy. Or at least a very good idea to look at this closely.</p>
<p>Busdriver11, your post about medicaid is interesting. Do you have a link?</p>