ENTtoday
  • Home
  • COVID-19
  • Practice Focus
    • Allergy
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Departments
    • Issue Archive
    • TRIO Best Practices
      • Allergy
      • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
      • Head and Neck
      • Laryngology
      • Otology/Neurotology
      • Pediatric
      • Rhinology
      • Sleep Medicine
    • Career Development
    • Case of the Month
    • Everyday Ethics
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Medical Education
    • Online Exclusives
    • Practice Management
    • Resident Focus
    • Rx: Wellness
    • Special Reports
    • Tech Talk
    • Viewpoint
    • What’s Your O.R. Playlist?
  • Literature Reviews
    • Allergy
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Events
    • Featured Events
    • TRIO Meetings
  • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Triological Society
    • Advertising Staff
    • Subscribe
  • Advertise
    • Place an Ad
    • Classifieds
    • Rate Card
  • Search

The Tax Bill’s Implications for Healthcare

by Steven M. Harris, Esq. • February 1, 2018

  • Tweet
  • Email
Print-Friendly Version

On December 20, 2017, Congress passed a massive tax bill, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, that will impact nearly every individual and business in America. While the bill makes sweeping revisions to existing tax provisions, it will also largely impact the health industry.

You Might Also Like

No related posts.

Individual Mandate Repealed

The bill repeals the individual mandate established in 2005 by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by eliminating the penalty for failure to maintain health insurance coverage.

Under the ACA, the individual mandate requires Americans to carry a minimum level of health coverage unless they qualify for a hardship exemption. Failure to maintain coverage would result in a monetary penalty. The purpose of this mandate was to widen the insurance pools to establish a more representative class of insured, which includes young, old, healthy, and sick individuals. Widening the pool was intended to reduce premiums through the idea that more people would be paying for coverage (instead of people enrolling only due to an illness and cancelling coverage once it was no longer needed), thereby reducing the overall cost of insurance.

It is anticipated that repealing the individual mandate will not affect most Americans because the majority of the population receives coverage through their employers or through a government program such as Medicare, Medicaid, Tricare, or CHAMPUS; however, those individuals who obtain coverage through private insurance markets will likely face higher premiums as a result of the repeal. Experts project that these higher premiums will destabilize the individual market and cause the number of uninsured Americans to rise.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) stated that approximately four million fewer people will have health insurance coverage in the first year that the repeal is effective. This number is projected to rise to 13 million by 2027. In addition to the rising number of uninsured individuals, the CBO expects premiums to rise approximately 10% each year of the first decade of the repeal.

As a result, some insurers will likely drop out of the market. Industry and consumer groups have expressed their concerns regarding the repeal. The American Academy of Actuaries called [PDF] the mandate an “integral component” of the ACA because it “helps encourage the young and healthy, as well as the old and sick, to obtain coverage, thus achieving the balanced risk pool required to keep premiums affordable and stable.” As a result, “insurers would likely reconsider their future participation in the market. This could lead to severe market disruption and loss of coverage among individual market enrollees.”

Impact on Providers

Providers will certainly be negatively impacted by the mandate’s repeal. When individuals opt out of insurance coverage, they will be less inclined to seek medical assistance when needed. This reduction in office visits will directly affect provider income, because there will be fewer encounters resulting in reimbursable claims. It is worth noting, however, that those individuals who opt out of insurance coverage are likely to be those who do not have an urgent need for healthcare. If this is the case, provider reimbursement may not be impacted too drastically, as many of the soon-to-be uninsured individuals would likely not be visiting medical professionals frequently due to the fact that they are generally in good health.

Pages: 1 2 | Single Page

Filed Under: Online Exclusives Tagged With: legislation, policy

You Might Also Like:

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

The Laryngoscope
Ensure you have all the latest research at your fingertips; Subscribe to The Laryngoscope today!

Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
Open access journal in otolaryngology – head and neck surgery is currently accepting submissions.

Classifieds

View the classified ads »

TRIO Best Practices

View the TRIO Best Practices »

Top Articles for Residents

  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Why More MDs, Medical Residents Are Choosing to Pursue Additional Academic Degrees
  • What Physicians Need to Know about Investing Before Hiring a Financial Advisor
  • Tips to Help You Regain Your Sense of Self
  • Should USMLE Step 1 Change from Numeric Score to Pass/Fail?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Vertigo in the Elderly: What Does It Mean?
    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name
    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?
    • Keeping Watch for Skin Cancers on the Head and Neck
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • What Happens to Medical Students Who Don’t Match?
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Vertigo in the Elderly: What Does It Mean?
    • Neurogenic Cough Is Often a Diagnosis of Exclusion
    • Novel Bioabsorbable Plate Associated with Lower Leak Risk in Patients Receiving Endoscopic Skull Base Repair
    • New Findings Support Use of Cemiplimab as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Resectable Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma
    • Kinetic Oscillation Stimulation an Effective, Lasting Second-Line Treatment for Patients with Nonallergic Rhinitis
    • Otolaryngologists Vary Significantly in Choice of Injectable Materials for Vocal Fold Injection Augmentation
    • COVID-19 Infection May Be Associated with Unique Manifestation of Facial Nerve Paralysis/Palsy

Polls

Do you believe that having more otolaryngologists appear on mainstream media outlets is a good thing for the field?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences

Visit: The Triological Society • The Laryngoscope • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology

Wiley
© 2023 The Triological Society. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN 1559-4939