Global Economic Intersection
Advertisement
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitIQ
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitIQ
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
Global Economic Intersection
No Result
View All Result

Estimated Budgetary Effects of Obamacare Decline

admin by admin
March 5, 2014
in Uncategorized
0
0
SHARES
2
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

Relative to the May 2013 projections, CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) now estimate that, in 2014:

  • About 1 million fewer people will obtain coverage through exchanges,
  • About 1 million fewer people will enroll in Medicaid and CHIP as a result of the ACA, and
  • About 1 million more people will be uninsured.

CBO’s The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2014 to 2024 released a few weeks ago contained the agency’s updated estimates of the effects of the insurance coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This blog post describes those revised projections of the sources of people’s insurance coverage and the net budgetary impact of those provisions, as detailed in Appendix B of the report.

The key elements of the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA that are encompassed by the estimates discussed here include the following:

  • Many individuals and families will be able to purchase subsidized insurance through exchanges operated either by the federal government or by a state government,
  • States are permitted to significantly expand eligibility for Medicaid but may decline to do so,
  • Most legal residents of the United States must either obtain health insurance or pay a penalty tax for not doing so,
  • Certain employers that decline to offer minimum health insurance coverage to their employees will be assessed penalties,
  • A federal excise tax will be imposed on some health insurance plans with high premiums, and
  • Insurers may not deny coverage to people on the basis of their health status or charge enrollees in poor health higher insurance premiums.

The ACA also made other changes to rules governing health insurance coverage that are not listed here.

As in the past, the projections of the effects of the ACA’s insurance coverage provisions on the federal budget were prepared by CBO in conjunction with staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). The new baseline estimates rely on analyses completed by the early part of December 2013 and account for administrative actions that were taken before then. But they do not reflect CBO’s updated economic projections, the most recent data on enrollment through insurance exchanges or the plans that have been offered through exchanges, and any actions that have been taken since then by federal agencies or state governments. Hence, these updates are both partial and preliminary. CBO typically revises its baseline budget projections after it obtains the data that accompany the Administration’s proposed budget for the coming year; CBO and JCT will incorporate into those revised baseline projections any new information and additional data about the effects of the ACA that have become available by that time.

CBO and JCT Estimate That the Coverage Provisions of the ACA Will Have a Net Cost to the Federal Government of $1.5 Trillion Over the 2015–2024 Period

In the current interim projections, CBO and JCT estimate that the ACA’s coverage provisions will result in a net cost to the federal government of $41 billion in 2014 and $1,487 billion over the 2015–2024 period. (All of the dollar amounts discussed here are for federal fiscal years, which run from October 1 through September 30.) Compared with last year’s projections, which spanned the 2014–2023 period, the new estimate represents a downward revision of $9 billion in the net costs of those provisions over that 10-year period. (That revision is discussed in more detail in the last section.)

The estimated net costs in 2014 stem almost entirely from spending for subsidies that will be provided through exchanges and from an increase in spending for Medicaid. For the 2015–2024 period, the projected net costs consist of the following:

  • Gross costs of $2,004 billion for Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), subsidies and related spending for insurance obtained through exchanges, and tax credits for small employers; and
  • Receipts of $517 billion from penalties on certain uninsured people and certain employers, an excise tax on high-premium insurance plans, and other budgetary effects—mostly increases in tax revenues.

The annual net costs are projected to rise noticeably over the next few years—to $151 billion in 2018— and then grow by more modest amounts in the following several years, reaching $173 billion in 2024.

All told, CBO and JCT now anticipate that, in each year during the period from 2017 through 2024, as a result of the ACA:

  • About 24 million or 25 million people will obtain health insurance each year through exchanges;
  • About 12 million or 13 million people will be added to the Medicaid and CHIP rolls;
  • About 6 million or 7 million fewer people will obtain insurance through their employer;
  • About 5 million fewer people will have nongroup or other coverage; and
  • About 25 million fewer people will be uninsured.

Those estimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA; they do not constitute all of the act’s budgetary effects. Many other provisions, on net, are projected to reduce budget deficits. Considering all of the coverage provisions and the other provisions together, CBO and JCT estimated in July 2012 (the most recent comprehensive estimates) that the total effect of the ACA would be to reduce federal deficits. (See Letter to the Honorable John Boehner providing an estimate for H.R. 6079, the Repeal of Obamacare Act.)

The Estimated Budgetary Effects of the ACA’s Coverage Provisions Have Changed Little on a Year-by-Year Basis Since March 2010

As time passes, projected costs over the subsequent 10 years have risen, because the time period spanned by the estimates has changed: Each time a year goes by, a less expensive early year is replaced by a more expensive later year in the 10-year period covered by the estimates.

But when those estimates are compared on a year-by-year basis, CBO and JCT’s estimate of the net budgetary impact of the ACA’s insurance coverage provisions has changed little since the legislation was being considered in March 2010. At that time, CBO and JCT projected that the provisions of the ACA related to health insurance coverage would cost the federal government $759 billion during fiscal years 2014 through 2019 (which was the last year in the 10-year budget window being used at that time). The newest projections indicate that those provisions will cost $701 billion over that same period. Intervening projections (March 2012 is shown in the figure below) of the cost of the ACA’s coverage provisions for those years have all been close to those figures on a year-by-year basis. (A blog postfrom last May contains a figure comparing all of our projections through CBO’s May 2013 baseline.)

Comparison of CBO's Estimates of the Net Budget Impact of the ACA's Coverage Provisions

The Estimated Budgetary Effects of the ACA’s Coverage Provisions Have Declined Slightly Since May 2013

The current projections do not differ substantially from the most recent previous ones, which were released in May 2013. In all, the revisions incorporated in the current baseline decrease by $9 billion the projected cost of the ACA’s insurance coverage provisions over the 2014–2023 period (the period covered by the previous baseline), from $1,363 billion to $1,354 billion (see the table at the bottom of this post). Nearly all of the change is for the 2014–2017 period.

Relative to the May 2013 projections, CBO and JCT now estimate that, in 2014:

  • About 1 million fewer people will obtain coverage through exchanges,
  • About 1 million fewer people will enroll in Medicaid and CHIP as a result of the ACA, and
  • About 1 million more people will be uninsured.

Those changes in enrollment primarily reflect the significant technical problems that have been encountered in the initial phases of implementing the ACA. Also, estimated premiums for 2014 have been reduced on the basis of a preliminary analysis of premiums for plans offered through exchanges. The updated estimates do not include changes to premiums for future years; the limited information available in early December regarding enrollment and premiums for insurance coverage in exchanges in 2014 did not provide a sound basis for changing estimates of enrollment or premiums for future years.

Several factors explain the various changes in the budgetary flows stemming from the ACA’s coverage provisions, including lower estimates for enrollment and exchange premiums, new estimates for the effects of risk corridors (a system of profit and loss sharing to limit the risks that insurers will face during their first few years of operating under the ACA), and the effects of recent administrative actions:

  • Downward revisions to the estimates of enrollment and premiums reduced the cost projected for the ACA’s insurance coverage provisions—including spending for Medicaid, CHIP, and exchange subsidies as well as effects on taxable compensation—by roughly $11 billion, on net, for fiscal years 2014 and 2015.
  • CBO and JCT also incorporated into the updated baseline projections some new estimates of payments and collections for the risk corridor program, which had previously been projected to have no net budgetary effect; collections are now projected to exceed payments by $8 billion for the 2015–2017 period.
  • The updated estimates include the budgetary effects of two administrative actions, which added, on net, $12 billion to projected deficits for the 2014–2016 period.

Those three sets of changes, together with a shift of roughly $1 billion in spending from “exchange subsidies and related spending” to other parts of the budget, account for the $9 billion reduction in the estimated net cost of the coverage provisions over the 2014–2023 period.

Comparison of CBO’s Current and Previous Estimates of the Effects of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act
May 2013 BaselineFebruary 2014 BaselineDifference
Change in Insurance Coverage
Under the ACA in 2014

(Millions of nonelderly people, by calendar year)a
Insurance Exchanges76-1
Medicaid and CHIP98-1
Employment-Based Coverageb***
Nongroup and Other Coveragec-2-2*
Uninsuredd-14-131
Effects on the Cumulative Federal Deficit,
2014 to 2023e

(Billions of dollars)
Exchange Subsidies and Related Spendingf1,0751,058-16
Medicaid and CHIP Outlays710708-2
Small-Employer Tax Creditsg1414**
Gross Cost of Coverage Provisions1,7981,780-18
Penalty Payments by Uninsured People-45-45**
Penalty Payments by Employersg-140-13010
Excise Tax on High-Premium Insurance Plansg-80-800
Other Effects on Revenues and Outlaysh-171-171-1
Net Cost of Coverage Provisions1,3631,354-9
Memorandum:
Net Collections and Payments for Risk Adjustment, Reinsurance, and Risk Corridorsi0-8-8

Sources: Congressional Budget Office; staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation.

Note: ACA = Affordable Care Act; CHIP = Children’s Health Insurance Program; * = between -500,000 and 500,000; ** = between -$500 million and $500 million.

a. Figures for the nonelderly population include residents of the 50 states and the District of Columbia who are younger than 65.

b. The change in employment-based coverage is the net result of projected increases and decreases in offers of health insurance from employers and changes in enrollment by workers and their families.

c. The effects are almost entirely for nongroup coverage; “other” includes Medicare.

d. The number of uninsured people includes unauthorized immigrants as well as people who are eligible for, but not enrolled in, Medicaid.

e. Positive numbers indicate an increase in the deficit; negative numbers indicate a decrease in the deficit. They also exclude effects on the deficit of other provisions of the Affordable Care Act that are not related to insurance coverage. They also exclude federal administrative costs subject to appropriation.

f. Includes spending for exchange grants to states and net collections and payments for risk adjustment, reinsurance, and risk corridors (see Memorandum). CBO’s May 2013 baseline also included an estimated $1 billion in spending for high-risk pools, premium review activities, and loans to consumer-operated and -oriented plans over the 2014–2023 period. A similar total is included elsewhere in CBO’s February 2014 baseline.

g. These effects on the deficit include the associated effects of changes in taxable compensation on revenues.

h. Consists mainly of the effects of changes in taxable compensation on revenues.

i. These effects are included in “Exchange Subsidies and Related Spending.”

Jessica Banthin is a Deputy Assistant Director in the Health, Retirement, and Long-Term Analysis Division. Sarah Masi is an analyst in CBO’s Budget Analysis Division.

Previous Post

Global Effects Of USA Monetary Policy

Next Post

Market Commentary: Markets Open Flat, Trading In Narrow range On Anemic Volume

Related Posts

Musk Hints He Could Reprice Twitter Deal As He Looks At Fake Accounts
Business

Musk Hints He Could Reprice Twitter Deal As He Looks At Fake Accounts

by John Wanguba
May 18, 2022
Madonna Joins Hands With Digital Artist “Beeple” To Launch New NFTs
Business

Madonna Joins Hands With Digital Artist “Beeple” To Launch New NFTs

by John Wanguba
May 18, 2022
Luna Foundation Sold 80,000 Bitcoin Amid UST Crash
Business

Luna Foundation Sold 80,000 Bitcoin Amid UST Crash

by John Wanguba
May 16, 2022
Bitcoin Network Strengthens As Mining Difficulty Reaches ATH Of 31.251T
Econ Intersect News

Bitcoin Network Strengthens As Mining Difficulty Reaches ATH Of 31.251T

by John Wanguba
May 15, 2022
Financial Giants Turn Attention To TikTok
Business

Financial Giants Turn Attention To TikTok

by John Wanguba
May 15, 2022
Next Post

Market Commentary: Markets Open Flat, Trading In Narrow range On Anemic Volume

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Browse by Category

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Browse by Tags

adoption altcoins banking Binance Bitcoin Bitcoin adoption Bitcoin market Bitcoin mining blockchain BTC business CBDC Coinbase crypto crypto adoption cryptocurrency crypto exchange crypto market crypto regulation decentralized finance DeFi digital assets Elon Musk ETH Ethereum finance funding government investment market analysis Metaverse mining NFT NFT marketplace NFTs nonfungible tokens nonfungible tokens (NFTs) price analysis regulation Russia social media technology Tesla the US Twitter

Archives

  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • August 2010
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized
Global Economic Intersection

After nearly 11 years of 24/7/365 operation, Global Economic Intersection co-founders Steven Hansen and John Lounsbury are retiring. The new owner, a global media company in London, is in the process of completing the set-up of Global Economic Intersection files in their system and publishing platform. The official website ownership transfer took place on 24 August.

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Recent Posts

  • Musk Hints He Could Reprice Twitter Deal As He Looks At Fake Accounts
  • Madonna Joins Hands With Digital Artist “Beeple” To Launch New NFTs
  • Luna Foundation Sold 80,000 Bitcoin Amid UST Crash

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Bitcoin Robot
    • Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Code
    • Quantum AI
    • eKrona Cryptocurrency
    • Bitcoin Up
    • Bitcoin Prime
    • Yuan Pay Group
    • Immediate Profit
    • BitIQ
    • Bitcoin Loophole
    • Crypto Boom
    • Bitcoin Era
    • Bitcoin Treasure
    • Bitcoin Lucro
    • Bitcoin System
    • Oil Profit
    • The News Spy
    • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Trader
  • Bitcoin Reddit

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

en English
ar Arabicbg Bulgarianda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfi Finnishfr Frenchde Germanel Greekit Italianja Japaneselv Latvianno Norwegianpl Polishpt Portuguesero Romanianes Spanishsv Swedish