TOTALLY GEEKED!

Because the person preparing the taxes was not up to speed on all the laws, rules and such.

We had been trying to get her insurance for weeks. Trying to find something I could afford and she could afford when she gets a job.

We finally got some information after the penalty.

Yes. We needed more information before going. But we were under the impression that if you didn't have insurance, you paid a fine.

Didn't know there was an exemption.

The thing that gets me the most is that after learning about the exemption, the fine will not be refunded.

Well what's done is done.

That is why I am posting this. Hopefully other's wont make the same mistake.

Had no idea there were exemptions.

No idea.

It's the tax preparer's fault, not Obamacare. I really wish people would get the facts straight before placing blame. I know that there are many things about the Affordable Care Act that need to be changed/fixed but there are good things about the program.

IKWTDS I will tell my parents what you said.

don't know what they will do.

Yes, I know about all the exemptions and all the penalties. Mainly because I work in insurance. But I also have been telling those I know who are without insurance about it.

There are many reasons a person can be exempt. There are subsidies to help. The penalties are different for different situations. And these will change for 2015 taxes.

But your parents situation is because of a poorly trained person doing taxes. All current software is up to date with all the codes and changes. There are many changes for 2014 taxes. Have them redo them and file as recommended above.

We shouldn't have this tax.

This exemption is not known by the General public.

I am not trying to defend what happened. Not knowing was a huge mistake.

All I am saying is, I don't want another to run into something similar.

Know before you go.

Another thing, those subsidies, people are having to pay those back. But if you need them, then how can you pay them back? And when you don't, that becomes another bill to pay or be fined for. It's ridiculous.

The wonderful thing is, C still doesn't and won't have insurance, but if she needs to go to the doctor, she will be able to.

flan327 wrote:

---

jlbear71 wrote:

---

It's the tax preparer's fault, not Obamacare. I really wish people would get the facts straight before placing blame. I know that there are many things about the Affordable Care Act that need to be changed/fixed but there are good things about the program.

---

Thanks for weighing in.

The bashing gets old.

flan 

---

 So does that ridiculous law.

Subsidies are now having to be paid back. Also there are fines attached, IN SOME CASES, to people when they file taxes. Don't care what anyone says. This stupid law is stupid.

The fine was over $600 bucks.

That is WAAAYY above the max.

The thing is when he started this thing it was supposed to be the best thing ever for those who couldn't afford insurance. Now it's hurting the ones that need it most.

Exactly NJN. It is doing nothing to help the ones between medcaid and middle income.

And the plans are ridiculous.

We are in the small minority that was helped by Ocare. We have always had a small group policy with very high deductible. $3,000 per person. Our premium went down by $2000 a month. And my SIL said a costly prescription that previously wasn't covered is now fee with no copay as of Jan 2015.

Lexxy wrote:

---

We are in the small minority that was helped by Ocare. We have always had a small group policy with very high deductible. $3,000 per person. Our premium went down by $2000 a month. And my SIL said a costly prescription that previously wasn't covered is now fee with no copay as of Jan 2015.

---

 I am not saying that everything about this law was bad.  SOME things are good.  The fact that preexisting conditions are no longer is a wonderful thing.  DH has bad GERD and takes Nexium.  That is the only thing wrong with him.  He's very healthy otherwise.  But when our insurance changed over (before ocare) he had to wait a whole year to get his Nexium paid for.  So I think that's something that's better.  And even though keeping kids on your insurance until they are 26 drains the insurance companies I still think it's a good idea.  We are no longer the society we were even fifty years ago where kids left high school, went to college, and then went straight into the work force with a good company that offered benefits.  For a long time employers have been cutting benefits.  And I know many kids who didn't graduate college at 22.  So I think that's a good change too.  Unfortunately, to get a few good changes we had to have a whole lot of bad changes happen.  And the bad far outweigh the good.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Lexxy wrote:

---

We are in the small minority that was helped by Ocare. We have always had a small group policy with very high deductible. $3,000 per person. Our premium went down by $2000 a month. And my SIL said a costly prescription that previously wasn't covered is now fee with no copay as of Jan 2015.

---

 I am not saying that everything about this law was bad.  SOME things are good.  The fact that preexisting conditions are no longer is a wonderful thing.  DH has bad GERD and takes Nexium.  That is the only thing wrong with him.  He's very healthy otherwise.  But when our insurance changed over (before ocare) he had to wait a whole year to get his Nexium paid for.  So I think that's something that's better.  And even though keeping kids on your insurance until they are 26 drains the insurance companies I still think it's a good idea.  We are no longer the society we were even fifty years ago where kids left high school, went to college, and then went straight into the work force with a good company that offered benefits.  For a long time employers have been cutting benefits.  And I know many kids who didn't graduate college at 22.  So I think that's a good change too.  Unfortunately, to get a few good changes we had to have a whole lot of bad changes happen.  And the bad far outweigh the good.

---

 The people who had issues with pre existing conditions were those that did not have continuous coverage.  I've gone from employer to employer and because I always had insurance, pre existing conditions were always covered, no penalty.  The problem was with people who had a break in coverage or had private insurance not through an employer. I have a problem with those who didn't always have coverage, they are the cruxt of the problem, they should have prioritized their expenses.

---

 We had constant coverage from birth and the insurance still didn't want to cover DD's skin condition until we had been with them for a year. We changed insurance companies, but always had coverage. It didn't matter.

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Lexxy wrote:

---

We are in the small minority that was helped by Ocare. We have always had a small group policy with very high deductible. $3,000 per person. Our premium went down by $2000 a month. And my SIL said a costly prescription that previously wasn't covered is now fee with no copay as of Jan 2015.

---

 I am not saying that everything about this law was bad.  SOME things are good.  The fact that preexisting conditions are no longer is a wonderful thing.  DH has bad GERD and takes Nexium.  That is the only thing wrong with him.  He's very healthy otherwise.  But when our insurance changed over (before ocare) he had to wait a whole year to get his Nexium paid for.  So I think that's something that's better.  And even though keeping kids on your insurance until they are 26 drains the insurance companies I still think it's a good idea.  We are no longer the society we were even fifty years ago where kids left high school, went to college, and then went straight into the work force with a good company that offered benefits.  For a long time employers have been cutting benefits.  And I know many kids who didn't graduate college at 22.  So I think that's a good change too.  Unfortunately, to get a few good changes we had to have a whole lot of bad changes happen.  And the bad far outweigh the good.

---

 The people who had issues with pre existing conditions were those that did not have continuous coverage.  I've gone from employer to employer and because I always had insurance, pre existing conditions were always covered, no penalty.  The problem was with people who had a break in coverage or had private insurance not through an employer. I have a problem with those who didn't always have coverage, they are the cruxt of the problem, they should have prioritized their expenses.

---

 We had constant coverage from birth and the insurance still didn't want to cover DD's skin condition until we had been with them for a year. We changed insurance companies, but always had coverage. It didn't matter.

---

 DH had insurance and then switched work.  His insurance ran out after thirty days and he was not eligible for the new insurance for ninety days leaving a gap of sixty days.  COBRA is not affordable.  It would be ridiculous for him to pay three grand for for COBRA when all he needed was Nexium for two months.  That IS prioritizing.   Especially when you have a family to feed.  You are putting everyone in the irresponsible category and that's not necessarily true.

---

 Agreed. We changed insurance companies because I changed jobs. My coverage actually almost overlapped by a week because I was covered on day 1 of my new job. But the skin condition was a predicting condition and they didn't care that she couldn't sleep without the cream - so I paid $200 out of pocket for it. In fact, I got a refil right before the insurance changed over in case this happened and we went through that before I called for a refil on the new insurance. 

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Lexxy wrote:

---

We are in the small minority that was helped by Ocare. We have always had a small group policy with very high deductible. $3,000 per person. Our premium went down by $2000 a month. And my SIL said a costly prescription that previously wasn't covered is now fee with no copay as of Jan 2015.

---

 I am not saying that everything about this law was bad.  SOME things are good.  The fact that preexisting conditions are no longer is a wonderful thing.  DH has bad GERD and takes Nexium.  That is the only thing wrong with him.  He's very healthy otherwise.  But when our insurance changed over (before ocare) he had to wait a whole year to get his Nexium paid for.  So I think that's something that's better.  And even though keeping kids on your insurance until they are 26 drains the insurance companies I still think it's a good idea.  We are no longer the society we were even fifty years ago where kids left high school, went to college, and then went straight into the work force with a good company that offered benefits.  For a long time employers have been cutting benefits.  And I know many kids who didn't graduate college at 22.  So I think that's a good change too.  Unfortunately, to get a few good changes we had to have a whole lot of bad changes happen.  And the bad far outweigh the good.

---

 The people who had issues with pre existing conditions were those that did not have continuous coverage.  I've gone from employer to employer and because I always had insurance, pre existing conditions were always covered, no penalty.  The problem was with people who had a break in coverage or had private insurance not through an employer. I have a problem with those who didn't always have coverage, they are the cruxt of the problem, they should have prioritized their expenses.

---

 We had constant coverage from birth and the insurance still didn't want to cover DD's skin condition until we had been with them for a year. We changed insurance companies, but always had coverage. It didn't matter.

---

 DH had insurance and then switched work.  His insurance ran out after thirty days and he was not eligible for the new insurance for ninety days leaving a gap of sixty days.  COBRA is not affordable.  It would be ridiculous for him to pay three grand for for COBRA when all he needed was Nexium for two months.  That IS prioritizing.   Especially when you have a family to feed.  You are putting everyone in the irresponsible category and that's not necessarily true.

---

 I hear what you are saying, but that cost per month for cobra is a heck of a lot cheaper than what the medical bills would be or in the past you get the comprehensive private plans to keep continuous coverage.  I am not lumping everyone in to that category.  As a matter of fact you used to make this same point.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

---

 I hear what you are saying, but that cost per month for cobra is a heck of a lot cheaper than what the medical bills would be or in the past you get the comprehensive private plans to keep continuous coverage.  I am not lumping everyone in to that category.  As a matter of fact you used to make this same point.

---

 I am saying that if you are single and without insurance for only two months and your ONLY health problem is that you take Nexium then no, COBRA is not worth it.  You are not likely to have a catastrophic event in those two months you are not going to be covered.  And if paying for COBRA means you won't be able to pay your child support then no, COBRA is not worth it if you are a relatively healthy person.  You should not have to wait a whole calendar year to get ANY services covered because you let it lapse for two months.  Sorry, don't agree.  This is one of the parts of ocare I agree with.  If you are moving from one job to another you should be able to have preexisting conditions covered.  I can only speak for OUR health care insurance in Texas.  Each employer gets to pick how long it takes to get you covered.  With some you are covered immediately, others 30 days, others 90 days, and others 6 months.  All insurances end 30 days after leaving employment.  This is something I think that needs to be mandated so that there is no lapse in coverage.  I know you see everyone as a mooch but it's just not that way.  Realistically people still have to pay bills and eat.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

---

 I hear what you are saying, but that cost per month for cobra is a heck of a lot cheaper than what the medical bills would be or in the past you get the comprehensive private plans to keep continuous coverage.  I am not lumping everyone in to that category.  As a matter of fact you used to make this same point.

---

 I am saying that if you are single and without insurance for only two months and your ONLY health problem is that you take Nexium then no, COBRA is not worth it.  You are not likely to have a catastrophic event in those two months you are not going to be covered.  And if paying for COBRA means you won't be able to pay your child support then no, COBRA is not worth it if you are a relatively healthy person.  You should not have to wait a whole calendar year to get ANY services covered because you let it lapse for two months.  Sorry, don't agree.  This is one of the parts of ocare I agree with.  If you are moving from one job to another you should be able to have preexisting conditions covered.  I can only speak for OUR health care insurance in Texas.  Each employer gets to pick how long it takes to get you covered.  With some you are covered immediately, others 30 days, others 90 days, and others 6 months.  All insurances end 30 days after leaving employment.  This is something I think that needs to be mandated so that there is no lapse in coverage.  I know you see everyone as a mooch but it's just not that way.  Realistically people still have to pay bills and eat.

---

 Wow really?  Don't put your words in my mouth.

---

 For you to say that everyone who doesn't pay for COBRA is irresponsible is just wrong.  It's a blanket sweeping statement.  And not taking COBRA does not make someone a bad person per se.  If you can't afford it then  you can't afford it.  It's sad that some people think it's okay for those people to later be penalized for having an existing condition.  "Well, it's okay to penalize them because they were too irresponsible to keep COBRA."  The world is not that black and white.

I know that DH has been laid off for four months. He's receiving unemployment. He applied to have his child support reduced because his child support is half of his unemployment check. The court date is six months away. So far we've been lucky and been able to keep our health benefits. But if they fire him, as they have done so many others in his company, I don't know what we'll do. His COBRA is three quarters of what he makes in unemployment. We simply, and realistically, can't afford COBRA. He really wants to go back to his old job but it probably won't be for a few more months. Hopefully we can hold out. Where some see people being irresponsible I see the reality of these situations.

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

I know that DH has been laid off for four months. He's receiving unemployment. He applied to have his child support reduced because his child support is half of his unemployment check. The court date is six months away. So far we've been lucky and been able to keep our health benefits. But if they fire him, as they have done so many others in his company, I don't know what we'll do. His COBRA is three quarters of what he makes in unemployment. We simply, and realistically, can't afford COBRA. He really wants to go back to his old job but it probably won't be for a few more months. Hopefully we can hold out. Where some see people being irresponsible I see the reality of these situations.

---

 There is a loop hole in COBRA that gives you time to figure things out.  I am not sure of the exact number of days but it works like this:

 

You have a period (I think 45 days) to decide if you want to use COBRA.  You then have a period to make the first payment ( I think 90 days).  So, on day 44 you inform then you want coverage.  On day 134 if you did not use any coverage you can let them know you will not be making a payment ( I do not think you really need to inform them). 

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

I know that DH has been laid off for four months. He's receiving unemployment. He applied to have his child support reduced because his child support is half of his unemployment check. The court date is six months away. So far we've been lucky and been able to keep our health benefits. But if they fire him, as they have done so many others in his company, I don't know what we'll do. His COBRA is three quarters of what he makes in unemployment. We simply, and realistically, can't afford COBRA. He really wants to go back to his old job but it probably won't be for a few more months. Hopefully we can hold out. Where some see people being irresponsible I see the reality of these situations.

---

 I agree that it's easy to say "well everyone should just do X". The reality for those of us living in the real world makes doing X almost impossible. It's easy to say just pay for it or find a way. Sometimes there is no way. You can't make $2000 stretch to cover $4000 for example. And if it comes down to paying the rent and feeding the kids over COBRA...it's a no brainer. And I know that the one time I needed COBRA, I was terrified to pay for it with my emergency fund even. What if I wasn't able to find a job quickly enough and I needed the emergency fund to pay the rent? It isnt always black and white. When in tough circumstances, people make the best choices they can. 

 

Heck, I am not proud of it, but when we were first married, I let our car insurance lapse for a year. We had nothing, no money, nothing. The cars we owned were old and barely working. The money I made just didn't cover it. I had to choose between affording day care so I could go to work and car insurance. I picked continuing to be able to work. Maybe I should have quit my job and gone on welfare, but I chose to be productive.  Luckily we didnt get into an accident, but honestly, we had nothing to lose or get sued over. It was a tough choice, but I had to do it. 

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

NJN, Nexium is now sold over the counter here.

flan

---

 Yes.  At the time he didn't have insurance to cover it wasn't over the counter.  Also the kind that is sold over the counter is not the kind he takes.  If he had to though and could probably substitute.  He'd have to take a massively higher dose though.

---

 I figured you knew, but just wanted to mention it.

I took the prescription stuff for a while, then switched to Prilosec, which works just as well for me.

flan

A had that problem. Can you imagine having that problem as a little kid?

Anyway. He took the Nexium and used liquid antacids. Thankfully, his healed about 3 years ago and he really hasn't had a big problem with it since.

Hope your DH gets the same results.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

I cannot agree that choosing NOT to pay for Cobra is irresponsible. Conserving your money to keep your roof over your head and your family fed while you are unemployed is much more important.

---

 But it's a moot point.  You have to have coverage whether that be Cobra or ACA.