 (Image: Manuel Van De Weijer under CC 2.0) |
The so-called tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans has been very controversial. However, most of the talk surrounding it is focused on the impact a tax on high-cost health insurance would have on union members. With relatively few Americans represented by organized labor, the Obama administration has appeared to think that it is a small price to pay in order to encourage companies and individuals to keep health care costs down.
However, a recent study from the Berkley Labor Center in California predicts that up to 80% of those affected would be in non-union jobs. The tax is approved of by Senate Democrats as a way to pay for comprehensive healthcare reform, but Democrats in the House are wary. They received some concessions in Obama’s proposal, but it will still have a far reaching impact on group health insurance.
Supporters believe that less spending on health insurance will result in higher wages, but many are skeptical. People also fear that the quality of their plans will deteriorate, and that the tax will not effectively distinguish between plans that are expensive due to heavily female or older workforces and those that are high-cost due to nonessential coverage (i.e. massage, acupuncture).
