by Daniel Kittell | Accounting News, Healthcare, IRS, News
On the mind of many Americans in recent months is how our new President will alter the healthcare system. His promise throughout the campaign was that Obamacare would be “repealed and replaced” as quickly as possible. However, we all know the feeling when our time frame for getting things done doesn’t always work out, or how we envisioned a project would turn out isn’t often the final product either. Just last week, the House passed an initial bill that reconfigures the healthcare system as it is today; however, it still has to pass the Senate, and will likely go through many changes and amendments before being finally accepted into law. Although Trumpcare may not look exactly how President Trump imagined, nor has it “repealed and replaced” Obamacare as rapidly as he may have originally hoped, here are some key differences between his plan and our current system.
- Immediate repeal of the 3.8% net investment income tax, which taxes income from royalties, interest, rents, dividends, passive activities and gains for those with a gross income over $200,000.
- Immediate repeal of the individual mandate excise tax, or the tax owed if you did not have health insurance.
- Health savings account withdrawal penalties would drop from the 20% under Obamacare to what it was before, 10%. This penalty only occurs if you withdraw money from an HSA before 65 for non-medical expenses.
- Removal of the $2,500 cap on the amount of pre-tax funds allowed to be placed in a healthcare flexible spending account. Decisions to impose a cap or not would be left up to employers.
- Those with FSA’s or HSA’s would also be allowed again to utilize those pre-tax funds on over-the-counter meds.
- Lowers the rate for medical itemized deductions. If you were under 65, Obamacare only allowed deductions for medical expenses that exceeded 10% of your adjusted gross income, whereas Trumpcare would take it back down to the previous 7.5% of your adjusted gross income.
- While Trumpcare would eventually repeal the 0.9% additional Medicare surtax on those with gross incomes over $200,000, it would not do so until 2023, which is later than the first healthcare bill the House introduced.
For the time being, these are the tax adjustments in place, although these could presumably change once the bill works its way through the Senate. This version of Trumpcare certainly differs from the House’s first proposal, but Americans may see many months pass and many modifications occur before the healthcare system truly moves away from Obamacare.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at dkittell@mkrcpas.com.
Take a look at my article on a similar topic: “The New GOP Healthcare Plan and What That Means for You”.
by Daniel Kittell | Healthcare, News, Tax Planning, Tax Planning - Individual
Our world is filled with seemingly constant changes and developments, however, most Americans have been paying close attention to the potential changes coming out of Washington. While President Trump made many statements about how he would revamp Washington if elected, one long-awaited claim has finally been revealed: his, and the GOP’s, promise to repeal and replace Obamacare. Now that their plan has been presented to the general public, questions many are asking include, what exactly does the plan entail? And how, or will, it affect me specifically, the taxpayer? Below are several points that will attempt to identify the main differences between the GOP’s plan and Obamacare, and what that truly means for you, the taxpayer.
- Changes the Insurance Mandate
Under Obamacare, individuals and employers are required to either buy or offer coverage, or else face a fine. The GOP’s plan would do away with those penalties for both individuals and employers. However, in an attempt to prevent individuals from simply adding coverage when they need care, the GOP’s plan would permit insurance companies to enforce higher premiums on individuals who do so for the first year of their coverage. - Changes in Medicaid
Another major difference between Obamacare and the GOP plan is how they approach Medicaid. Many who gained coverage under Obamacare did so through Medicaid provisions, including an expansion that covered those within 138% of poverty levels, as well as a federal payout to those states that expanded their coverage and insured those newly eligible. The GOP plan would eventually eliminate the expansion, only giving states extra funding for those enrolled before 2020, and provide a set amount of money to states based on their enrollment numbers in 2016, rather than providing open-ended matching for Medicaid beneficiaries. - Changes in Age-based Premiums
While Obamacare did allow insurance companies to vary their premiums based on factors such as location, tobacco use and age, there was a 3-to-1 limit based on age. Essentially, the premium for an older individual could not be more than three times the amount charged for a younger person purchasing the same plan. The GOP would alter this limit and allow insurance companies to charge older individuals up to five times the amount of those who are younger. - Changes in Tax Credits
The tax credits under Obamacare subsidized insurance for those using government-run insurance exchanges, providing credits based on the enrollee’s income and cost of coverage in their area. The GOP’s plan would tie credits to age and income (rather than cost of coverage), and would look to end cost-sharing subsidies. Credits would start at $2,000 for those in their 20’s and increase gradually, reaching to $4,000 for those over 60. However, these credits would only be available to individuals making $75,000 or less and households making $150,000 or less.
The GOP’s bill would still allow adults under the age of 26 to be covered under their parent’s plans, as well as maintain the provision blocking insurers from denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions. Because the plan has significant reviews to undergo , and most likely many amendments to be made, before American’s see a final proposal, many will want to wait and see before assuming they may qualify for specific credits or that their coverage may be affected based on age or income. Though change will certainly occur, taxpayers would be advised to maintain their current coverage until the final bill is passed.
If you have any questions about how the changes to the Health Care Laws may affect you, please contact me at dkittell@MKRcpas.com.
by Jean Miller | Accounting News, Healthcare, News, Resources, Tax, Tax Planning, Tax Planning - Individual, Tax Preparation - Individual
The Trump administration has wasted little time taking action on many of the promises that were made throughout the campaign. One major proposition made by President Trump was the immediate repeal and replacement of Obamacare. While the replacement of our current healthcare system seems to be pending, the repealing of the current system is certainly at the top of the administration’s list. Although the insurance aspect of the current system would seemingly stick around until the GOP and the Trump administration develop a suitable alternative, the tax aspects of Obamacare could be subject to immediate repeal. Thus, the insurance industry may have until 2018 or 2019 before they saw changes, but the tax industry (and therefore taxpayers) could see effects as early as this year.
How exactly the current administration chooses to repeal the tax aspects of Obamacare could be positive or negative for most taxpayers though. Under current law, there is an individual insurance mandate that penalizes monthly those who do not have insurance coverage, as well as an employer mandate penalizing employers (with more than 50 full-time employees) who do not offer affordable health care. However, if individuals obtain coverage through the state marketplaces and their income is between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level, they receive a tax credit to assist in paying for their insurance premiums. Additionally, Obamacare levies a 0.9% Medicare tax and a 3.8% net investment income tax on certain high wage earners, or the wealthiest 2% of Americans.
Where repealing taxes associated with Obamacare could be positive for Americans is if Congress removed all taxes while maintaining the premium tax credit (until a replacement system is established). This would mean employers are no longer charged for not providing insurance coverage, taxpayers are not penalized for not having insurance and high wage earners will not be levied the additional taxes discussed above. If Congress chose this route, tax experts estimate that low to middle income wage earners could receive a tax break in the hundreds of dollars, whereas high end wage earners could receive a break in the thousands of dollars.
However, if Congress chose to repeal all tax aspects, including the premium credit, certain tax brackets would most certainly see negative effects. Without the credit, lower income brackets could see their taxes rise by an average of $4,000, middle income brackets could see their taxes rise by an average of $6,000, but higher income brackets would still see their taxes lowered by the thousands of dollars. But, these negative changes would only exist for lower or middle income brackets who currently claim the premium tax credit. Fortunately, at this point, Congress nor the Trump administration has made any claims about what they will do in terms of repealing Obamacare-related taxes, so Americans will simply have to wait and see what direction our nation’s leaders choose and how their wallets will be affected.
by Pete McAllister | Accounting News, Bookkeeping, Business Consulting, Healthcare, News, Resources, Tax Consulting, Tax Planning, Tax Planning - Individual, Tax Preparation - Individual
The Latest Tax Implications of the Affordable Care Act Update (Obamacare)
Did you know the health care law actually created two new taxes to help pay for the cost of the ACA? The first of the two taxes is the Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT).
It is a new Medicare tax that applies to certain types of income received by the taxpayer.
Income that is subject to net investment income tax are the following:
- Interest
- Dividends
- Annuities
- Royalties
- Rental
- Capital Gains
Income that is not subject to the net investment income tax are:
- Wages
- Unemployment
- Income from an active business (S-Corp flow through)
- Social Security
- Alimony
- Tax-exempt interest
- Self-employment income
- IRA & Pension Distributions
The tax will apply to taxpayers with Income above the following thresholds (Adjusted Gross Income):
- Married Filing Joint $250,000
- Married Filing Separate $125,000
- Single $200,000
The tax is 3.8% applied to the lessor of the following:
– Taxpayers net investment income
– The amount of AGI above the threshold amount
Example: Tommy is a single individual with an adjusted gross income of $210,000 which included $20,000 of interest and $20,000 in dividends.
Tax is computed as follows:
Net investment income of $40,000
Adjusted gross income of $210,000
Threshold for singles: ($200,000)
Excess: $10,000
Lessor of A or B: $10,000
Taxable at 3.8%: $380
The second new tax is the Additional Medicare Tax
The Affordable Care Act also created a .9% tax called the Additional Medicare Tax, which is entirely separate from the 3.8% net investment income tax discussed earlier.
Taxpayers with wages and/or self-employment income above certain thresholds are subject to the additional tax.
The thresholds are the same as the net investment income tax.
- $250,000 for joint filings
- $125,000 for married separate filings
- $200,000 for singles
How is the tax calculated and paid?
Example:
Rudy is employed as a lawyer with Duey Cheatem and Howe. He is single and has the following annual earnings:
W-2 Wages $240,000
Interest $30,000
Total Income $270,000
Since Rudy’s wages exceed his threshold by $40,000 he is subject to the additional Medicare tax on this $40,000 or $360.00 ($40,000*.9%)
**Note he is also subject to the net investment income tax and will pay an additional $1,140 in NIIT. ($30,000*3.8%)
Now let’s address the individual medical insurance coverage mandate.
Effective January 1, 2014, individuals must maintain a minimum essential insurance coverage or pay a shared responsibility payment (penalty) on their tax return.
Here is what we think will happen at tax time since no specific guidance has been released yet:
During January 2015 when you are receiving all your other tax documents, your insurance company will send you a form for proof of insurance that you will need to provide your tax preparer. This form will show the type of coverage you have and the number of months during 2014 the policy was in place. If it was not in place the entire 12 months, then you are subject to the penalty for those months.
Without this proof of insurance information the penalty will be assessed.
Now, the time bomb no one is talking about.
Taxpayers who purchased health insurance policies through the exchange that was set up by the government could have surprises at tax time.
Part of the Affordable Care Act created a tax credit for lower income families and individuals depending on family size and geographic location. The lower the income the higher the credit. Sort of makes sense.
Here is the flaw:
During the application process one of the questions is “What do you think your 2014 income will be?” Based on the answer, it calculates your potential premium credit and asks if you want that applied to your monthly premium or wait and receive when you file your 2014 taxes.
What do you think has happened?
You think people figured out they could enter a lower amount for anticipated income and receive a larger credit? You got it! And of course they have applied it to their monthly premiums so they are paying a much lower amount than they should.
What happens next you ask?
At tax time we have to prepare a reconciliation of premium credits received already versus what they are entitled to, based on their actual income. If they have received too much in credits they are required to repay the excess credit. So taxpayers who usually get refunds will have balances due; these could be quite large, and as they are in the lower income bracket they will not have the money to pay them. What will the IRS do? No guidance on this one yet. Nobody is talking about it, but it is real.
Please contact us with your questions about this Affordable Care Act Tax Implications Update, or schedule your consultation by calling us at 317-549-3091.
We’re here to help you be prepared for next year and beyond for your personal and business tax needs.
by Pete McAllister | Accounting News, Audit and Accounting, Healthcare, IRS, News, Professional Services, Resources, Retail & Distribution, Tax Consulting, Tax Planning, Tax Planning - Individual, Tax Preparation - Individual
As the third year of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) approaches, employers need to be aware of additional fees that will be assessed on insurers and plan administrators of self-insured plans beginning in 2013. In addition, reporting health care costs to the government begins.
The new fees will increase the cost of providing group health plans for employees. They include:
- Fees to fund research on patient-centered outcomes
- Transitional reinsurance fees
- Pay or play penalties
- Cadillac tax
Fees to fund research on patient-centered outcomes
Health care reform created the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which is charged with promoting research to evaluate and compare the health outcomes and clinical effectiveness, risks, and benefits of medical treatments, services, procedures, and drugs. PCORI is to be funded in part by fees assessed on health insurers and sponsors of self-insured group health plans. This fee is commonly referred to as the “comparative effectiveness fee” or “PCORI fee.” The PCORI fee will be assessed at $1.00 times the average number of covered lives (employees and dependents) for the first plan or policy year ending on or after October 1, 2012. Employer plan sponsors must choose a method for calculating the average number of covered lives for their required annual fees by December 31, 2012, for calendar year plans.
Transitional reinsurance fees
The transitional reinsurance program will require health insurance issuers, as well as certain plan administrators on behalf of self-insured group health plans, to make contributions to a transitional reinsurance program for the three-year period beginning January 1, 2014. This fee is likely to result in additional costs for employer plan sponsors and – depending on whether the plan at issue is self-administered – certain additional reporting obligations.
Pay or play penalties
In 2014, large employers with fifty or more full-time equivalent employees could be subject to two potential penalties: the No Coverage Penalty and the Unaffordable Coverage Penalty. The No Insurance Penalty subjects certain employers to a $2,000 per full-time employee penalty (excluding the first thirty full-time employees) under specific conditions. The Unaffordable Coverage Penalty applies if an employer offers its full-time employees the opportunity to enroll in coverage under an employer plan that either is unaffordable (relative to an employee’s household income) or does not provide minimum value. This penalty is $3,000 for every full-time employee who receives a subsidy for coverage in a state exchange.
In some cases, the total cost of these penalties may be less than the total cost of providing coverage. CliftonLarsonAllen’s Health Insurance and Penalty Calculator provides information about the impact of reform on individual companies.
Cadillac tax
Starting in 2018, insurers of employer-sponsored plans or companies that self-insure their own plans will be subject to an excise tax if their premiums are in excess of $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for family coverage. Roughly 60 percent of large employers believe their plans would trigger the tax unless they take action to avoid it, according to a 2011 survey by Mercer, a human resources consulting firm. Although the tax is to be imposed on insurers, the effects are likely to trickle down to consumers.
Many health care reform provisions will impact the cost to provide health care coverage for employees. Employers should be aware of the additional fees and reporting requirements and work with their benefits consultants to determine the financial impact of health care on their businesses. Plan sponsors should have already verified that they have the systems in place to determine and report the aggregate cost of applicable employer-sponsored coverage for 2012 on employees’ Forms W-2.
Click Here to read full article
by Amanda O'Brien | Accounting News, Audit and Accounting, Healthcare, IRS, Tax
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is bracing for one of the biggest challenges it has faced in years: the implementation of the massive new health care legislation.
A few select provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 – the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for short – have already taken effect; however, the most controversial sections of the new law are not scheduled to kick in until 2014. According to a new report released by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) on January 5, 2012, the IRS Appeals Office is gearing up for the anticipated onslaught.
The TIGTA report indicates that the new law’s impact on appeals should be minimal for the next two years, but it expects the floodgates to open in 2014. The IRS Appeals Office has made some initial preparations, including reassigning some of its staff to the IRS ACA division, as well as creating an internal website with links to ACA-related IRS training, guidance, and other resources.
“Because of the potential for the ACA to affect most taxpayers, effective planning is critical to ensuring Appeals’ readiness to prepare for this legislation and resolve taxpayer requests in a timely and effective manner,” said J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, in a press release.
The latest TIGTA report follows up on a mostly positive audit conducted last year. In that audit, TIGTA determined that the IRS appears to be on track in meeting the new technological challenges it can expect to face as a result of the health care legislation.
Under several key provisions in the new law, individuals who are not eligible for Medicare or Medicaid must obtain minimum health coverage, while businesses are generally required to offer minimum coverage to their employees. The IRS bears the burden of collecting penalties from taxpayers and business entities that fail to live up to their responsibilities. In addition, health insurance coverage will become available through exchanges operated by the individual states.
Currently, a qualified small business can claim tax credits for providing health insurance coverage to its employees. For 2014 and thereafter, an employer may benefit from tax credits offsetting part of the cost of offering coverage through one of the state-run exchanges.
The IRS expects to face numerous appeals on these issues as both individuals and employers grapple with the new ACA rules. In the meantime, what can you do? Tax professionals are advised to educate themselves well in advance of 2014 in order to be responsive to their clients’ needs.
Full Article: http://www.accountingweb.com/topic/fitness/irs-gears-health-care-law-appeals
