Bill Overview
Title: Family Health Care Affordability Act of 2022
Description: This bill modifies the requirement for determining the affordability of employer-sponsored minimum essential health care coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). (Under current law, the coverage is unaffordable, and an employee may be eligible for premium assistance tax credits, if the employee's required contribution for an individual plan exceeds 9.5% of household income.) The bill specifies that, with respect to an employee's family members who are eligible to enroll in the plan, affordability must be determined using the cost of family coverage rather than individual coverage to expand the eligibility of families for premium assistance tax credits.
Sponsors: Rep. Wild, Susan [D-PA-7]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals receiving employer-sponsored health insurance worldwide
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill modifies the affordability determination for employer-sponsored health insurance, shifting the focus from individual to family coverage.
- This change will particularly impact families where one or more members are covered under an employer-sponsored health plan.
- Individuals who are currently employed and receive health insurance through their employer will be affected, especially if they have dependents.
- The effect is primarily on middle-class working families whose prior premiums for family plans were considered affordable under the old rule.
Reasoning
- This policy directly impacts families who use employer-sponsored health insurance by changing the cost calculation.
- Middle-class families who previously couldn't afford family plans may benefit from tax credits, increasing their disposable income and wellbeing.
- Not all individuals will be affected; some who do not get insurance through a job or don't have family members on their plan will see no effect.
- Budgetary constraints mean not all families can receive the maximum possible benefit, and the impact will vary significantly within the affected population.
Simulated Interviews
teacher (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Currently, it's really hard to cover the whole family under my employer's plan.
- The change in law could mean more money in my pocket through tax credits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m glad families are getting more support, but it doesn’t change my situation as I don’t have dependents.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
nurse (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could help me afford better healthcare for my child without sacrificing other needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
software developer (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy is great for families but it doesn't affect me.
- The focus should maybe also cover some single individuals who are stretched.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
accountant (Miami, FL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a huge relief as our family premiums are quite high and every bit of help counts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
retired (Denver, CO)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy won't affect us as my children are no longer on the plan.
- It's good for those still raising kids though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
lawyer (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With our income, even small help can improve our financial stress regarding healthcare.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
bartender (Seattle, WA)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad that families can get more help but it doesn't impact me directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
sales manager (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change doesn’t impact us right now as we don’t have kids but it’s positive for future planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
electrician (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The cost of living here is so high that any support like this helps significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4500000000 (Low: $4000000000, High: $5000000000)
Year 2: $4600000000 (Low: $4100000000, High: $5100000000)
Year 3: $4700000000 (Low: $4200000000, High: $5200000000)
Year 5: $4800000000 (Low: $4200000000, High: $5400000000)
Year 10: $5000000000 (Low: $4300000000, High: $5600000000)
Year 100: $5500000000 (Low: $4700000000, High: $6000000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy change focuses on family coverage affordability rather than individual coverage.
- An increase in the number of families eligible for premium assistance may lead to higher federal spending on healthcare subsidies.
- Previous definitions of affordability skewed towards individual coverage costs; this policy corrects that for families.
- The bill targets employer-sponsored plans where employees previously had limited affordable family coverage options.