Catholics vs. Abortion vs. Obama's mandate... - Page 15

 

This is very surprising, and I wouldnt be surprised to see that you have to reimburse that money to your plan sometime soon.  Neither me or my wife are able to purchase OTC medications with our FSA's any more.  Gets flat out rejected at the store...

You must have a prescription for OTC, otherwise, it is not reimbursable.  Also, you can not use debit cards to purchase OTC, even with the prescription.  You have to do submissions directly.

Do you never tire of being shown wrong?

 

http://www.jlbghealth.com/blog/archives/314-New-health-care-laws-and-impact-on-HSAs,-FSAs,-and-HRAs.html

 

Changes Impacting All Health Care Accounts (FSAs, HRAs, HSAs, and Archer MSAs)

P.L. 111-148 includes a change in the definition of a “qualified medical expense” that impacts reimbursements and withdrawals under all types of health care accounts (i.e., FSAs, HRAs, HSAs, and Archer MSAs). Beginning with 2011, expenses incurred for over-the-counter (OTC) medications will no longer be eligible for payment or reimbursement from any of the health care accounts. However, the law would still allow OTC medicines obtained with a prescription and insulin to be reimbursed or paid tax-free from these accounts.

The new law imposes an excise tax of 40 percent on employer-sponsored coverage that has a benefit value in excess of $10,200 for single coverage and $27,500 for family coverage (indexed annually). The benefit value of employer-sponsored coverage would include the value of the group health plan and contributions to employees’ FSAs, HRAs, and HSAs. This tax would be imposed on insurance companies, including self-insured plans and plans sold in the group market, and plan administrators. However, this provision does not go into effect until 2018

 

Changes Impacting Only Flexible Spending Arrangements (FSAs)

H.R.3590 imposes a new annual limit on contributions made by employees to flexible spending arrangements (FSAs) for health care. The legislation limits contributions to no more than $2,500 annually. The limit is indexed to inflation for future years. H.R.4872 delayed the effective date of this provision to 2013.

 

 

http://www.savingtoinvest.com/2010/03/health-care-reform-bill-and-higher.html

 

- Starting in 2013 The legislation for the first time would place a $2,500 limit on what can be contributed to employer-sponsored flexible spending accounts, another type of account funded with pre-tax dollars that can be used to pay for medicines, co-payments, and other expenses.

 

https://www.aetna.com/health-reform-connection/questions-answers/fund-products.html#12

 

FSA contributions

 

How are the FSA contribution rules impacted?

 

Tax advantaged contributions to FSA accounts will be limited to $2,500, effective January 1, 2013

Uh, I just bought a couple bottles of Tylenol, some Allegra, and some other sinus medications at CVS the other day.  Don't know what you're talking about.

guess it will bite you later.

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=227308,00.html

If you have an HSA or an Archer MSA, distributions for expenses that are not qualifying medical expenses (including over-the-counter medicines and drugs purchased without a prescription) will be included in your gross income and subject to an additional tax of 20%. The income tax and additional tax are reported on Form 8889 for an HSA distribution and on Form 8853 for an Archer MSA distribution. You complete these forms and attach them to your Form 1040 when you file your income tax return. Distributions from an HSA or an Archer MSA are not included as taxable wages and do not affect your Form W-2.

Have you submitted them for payment through your flex plan yet?

 

Here's anopther article about it

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/08/AR2010110804192.html?hpid=topnews

He said "effictive Jan 1st".  He didn't day Jan 1st, 2013.  Considering this is only FEBRUARY, why would I think he meant NEXT YEAR.  Also, you need to learn to read the ACTUAL bill.  This isn't a limitation on Health Spending Accounts, but on FLEXIBLE Spending Accounts, and only FSA's under specific "Cafeteria Plans":

 

 

SEC. 9005. LIMITATION ON HEALTH FLEXIBLE SPENDING ARRANGEMENTS

UNDER CAFETERIA PLANS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code

of 1986 is amended—

(1) by redesignating subsections (i) and (j) as subsections

(j) and (k), respectively, and

26 USC 125.

26 USC 220 note.

26 USC 106 note.

26 USC 220 note.

26 USC 106.

26 USC 220.

26 USC 223.

26 USC 6051

note.

VerDate Nov 24 2008 11:34 May 26, 2010 Jkt 089139 PO 00148 Frm 00736 Fmt 6580 Sfmt 6581 E:\PUBLAW\PUBL148.111 APPS06 PsN: PUBL148 dkrause on GSDDPC29PROD with PUBLIC LAWS

PUBLIC LAW 111–148—MAR. 23, 2010 124 STAT. 855

(2) by inserting after subsection (h) the following new subsection:

‘‘(i) LIMITATION ON HEALTH FLEXIBLE SPENDING ARRANGEMENTS.—

For purposes of this section, if a benefit is provided under

a cafeteria plan through employer contributions to a health flexible

spending arrangement, such benefit shall not be treated as a qualified

benefit unless the cafeteria plan provides that an employee

may not elect for any taxable year to have salary reduction contributions

in excess of $2,500 made to such arrangement.’’.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section

shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2010.

SEC. 9006. EXPANSION OF INFORMATION REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6041 of the Internal Revenue Code

of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsections:

‘‘(h) APPLICATION TO CORPORATIONS.—Notwithstanding any

regulation prescribed by the Secretary before the date of the enactment

of this subsection, for purposes of this section the term ‘person’

includes any corporation that is not an organization exempt from

tax under section 501(a).

‘‘(i) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary may prescribe such regulations

and other guidance as may be appropriate or necessary to

carry out the purposes of this section, including rules to prevent

duplicative reporting of transactions.’’.

(b) PAYMENTS FOR PROPERTY AND OTHER GROSS PROCEEDS.—

Subsection (a) of section 6041 of the Internal Revenue Code of

1986 is amended—

(1) by inserting ‘‘amounts in consideration for property,’’

after ‘‘wages,’’,

(2) by inserting ‘‘gross proceeds,’’ after ‘‘emoluments, or

other’’, and

(3) by inserting ‘‘gross proceeds,’’ after ‘‘setting forth the

amount of such’’.

(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section

shall apply to payments made after December 31, 2011.

SEC. 9007. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CHARITABLE HOSPITALS.

(a) REQUIREMENTS TO QUALIFY AS SECTION 501(C)(3) CHARITABLE

HOSPITAL ORGANIZATION.—Section 501 of the Internal Revenue

Code of 1986 (relating to exemption from tax on corporations,

certain trusts, etc.) is amended by redesignating subsection (r)

as subsection (s) and by inserting after subsection (q) the following

new subsection:

‘‘(r) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN HOSPITALS.—

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—A hospital organization to which this

subsection applies shall not be treated as described in subsection

(c)(3) unless the organization—

‘‘(A) meets the community health needs assessment

requirements described in paragraph (3),

‘‘(B) meets the financial assistance policy requirements

described in paragraph (4),

‘‘(C) meets the requirements on charges described in

paragraph (5), and

‘‘(D) meets the billing and collection requirement

described in paragraph (6).

‘‘(2) HOSPITAL ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH SUBSECTION

APPLIES.—

Applicability.

26 USC 501.

26 USC 6041

Theoretically speaking, lets say 49% of pregnancies in the US were unintended (roughtly 3.1 million in a year) and of those unintended pregancies 44% ended in birth 42% ended in abortion and 14% were dealt with by a higher power.  And I suppose if roughly half of the unintended pregancies occured among women who were not using any form of contraception, then it would seem like the number would indicate that YES people who don't want kids do end up having kids because they didn't have birth control available to them.

 

Of course it is hard to tell how much the roughly 650,000 births/year of unintended births among women not using any form of contraceptive would have would be reduced if contraceptive was more accessable. 

 

 

 

How remote must you live to not have any form of birth control available?

While I suppose distance would be one obstacle in the way of obtaining birth control.  Cost, stigma, regional laws, religious beliefs may also be obstacles.  But to answer your question, I'd say 5 miles...

  funny answer but none of those have anything to do with availability.   Five miles?  That WOULD explain a lot of unplanned pregnancy.  But if it not available because you're too friggin' lazy to go the five miles to get it then how is insurance going to help?

 

 

Actually 5 miles might be a little high.  Based on data, of the women who had unintended pregnancies and weren't on BC 14% weren't on BC because they didn't plan on having sex.  So in that case any distance would probably be to remote beyond whats within reach...

 

As far as how insurance can help, its difficult to say, but if you look at reported data since the federal government made it mandatory to cover contraceptives for federal employees, you might note that there has been no increase in costs.  And apparently among studies of private insurers, the Cost of providing health care is about 15% higher for plans that do not provide contraceptives.

 

Why is this?  I have no idea, I can only speculate, but the numbers do seem to indicate that coverage for contraceptives for whatever reason does reduce overall healthcare costs.

 

So you are saying the IRS is wrong? Direct from their website, which I already linked for you.

Affordable Care Act: Questions and Answers on Over-the-Counter Medicines and Drugs


1. How are the rules changing for reimbursing the cost of over-the-counter medicines and drugs from health flexible spending arrangements (health FSAs) and health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs)?

A. Section 9003 of the Affordable Care Act established a new uniform standard for medical expenses. Effective Jan. 1, 2011, distributions from health FSAs and HRAs will be allowed to reimburse the cost of over-the-counter medicines or drugs only if they are purchased with a prescription. This new rule does not apply to reimbursements for the cost of insulin, which will continue to be permitted, even if purchased without a prescription.

2. How are the rules changing for distributions from health savings accounts (HSAs) and Archer Medical Savings Accounts (Archer MSAs) that are used to reimburse the cost of over-the-counter medicines and drugs?

A. In accordance with Section 9003 of the Affordable Care Act, only prescribed medicines or drugs (including over-the-counter medicines and drugs that are prescribed) and insulin (even if purchased without a prescription) will be considered qualifying medical expenses and subject to preferred tax treatment.

3. When will the changes become effective?

A. The changes are effective for purchases of over-the-counter medicines and drugs without a prescription after Dec. 31, 2010. The changes do not affect purchases of over-the-counter medicines and drugs in 2010, even if they are reimbursed after Dec. 31, 2010.

4. How do I prove that I have purchased an over-the-counter medicine or drug with a prescription so that I can get reimbursed from my employer's health FSA or an HRA?

A. If your employer’s health FSA or HRA reimburses these expenses, you would provide the prescription (or a copy of the prescription or another item showing that a prescription for the item has been issued) and the customer receipt (or similar third-party documentation showing the date of the sale and the amount of the charge). For example, documentation could consist of a customer receipt issued by a pharmacy that reflects the date of sale and the amount of the charge, along with a copy of the prescription; or it could consist of a customer receipt that identifies the name of the purchaser (or the name of the person for whom the prescription applies), the date and amount of the purchase and an Rx number.

5. How does this change affect over-the-counter medical devices and supplies?

A. The new rule does not apply to items for medical care that are not medicines or drugs. Thus, equipment such as crutches, supplies such as bandages, and diagnostic devices such as blood sugar test kits will still qualify for reimbursement by a health FSA or HRA if purchased after Dec. 31, 2010, and a distribution from an HSA or Archer MSA for the cost of such items will still be tax-free, regardless of whether the items are purchased using a prescription.

6. Will I need a prescription to use my health FSA, HRA, HSA or Archer MSA funds for insulin purchases after Dec. 31, 2010?

A. No. You can continue to use your health FSA, HRA, HSA or Archer MSA funds to purchase insulin without a prescription after Dec. 31, 2010.

7. I use health FSA funds for my co-pays and deductibles. Will I still be able to reimburse those expenses with health FSA funds after Dec. 31, 2010?

A. Yes. Co-pays and deductibles continue to be reimbursable from a health FSA after Dec. 31, 2010. Similarly, funds from an HRA can continue to be used for these expenses and a distribution from an HSA or Archer MSA for these purposes will be tax-free.

8. My company gives me two extra months beyond the end of the year to submit claims for health FSA expenses incurred during the year. What happens if I purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs without a prescription in 2010 but do not submit the claim for those expenses until January 2011? Will they qualify for reimbursement?

A. Yes. The new restriction on plan reimbursements for the cost of over-the-counter medicines or drugs without a prescription applies only to purchases that are made after 2010.

9. My company’s health FSA includes a provision for a grace period, so that if I don’t spend all of the money in my health FSA by Dec. 31 in a given year, I can still use the amount left in my health FSA at the end of the year to reimburse expenses I incur during the first 2 ½ months of the following year. If I buy over-the-counter medicines or drugs without a prescription during the 2 ½ month grace period of 2011, can I still use the amount left in my health FSA at the end of 2010 to reimburse those expenses?

A. No. The change applies to purchases made on or after Jan. 1, 2011. Thus, even if your employer’s plan includes the 2 ½ month grace period provision, the cost of over-the-counter medicines and drugs purchased without a prescription during the first 2 ½ months of 2011 will not be eligible to be reimbursed by a health FSA.

10. If my health FSA or HRA issues a debit card that I use to pay for over-the-counter medicines or drugs, will I still be able to use the card to purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs after Dec. 31, 2010?

A. Generally, yes, if you have a prescription for the medicine or drug. For expenses incurred in 2010, you may continue to use an FSA or HRA debit card to purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs (whether or not you have a prescription) at pharmacies and from mail order and web-based vendors that sell prescription drugs. Starting after Jan. 15, 2011, you may continue to use an FSA or HRA debit card to purchase over-the-counter medicines or drugs at these vendors, so long as you obtain a prescription for the medicine or drug, the prescription is presented to the pharmacist, and the medication is dispensed by the pharmacist and given an Rx number.

For further information, including guidance on purchases of over-the-counter medicines and drugs from health care providers other than pharmacies and mail order and web-based vendors (such as physicians or hospitals), see IRS Notice 2011-5. For guidance on debit card purchases at “90 percent pharmacies,” see IRS Notice 2010-59.

11. The ACA removed over-the-counter medicines and drugs from the list of reimbursable qualified medical items if purchased without a prescription. If you have an HSA, Archer MSA, health FSA, or HRA, how will the change in the law affect reporting on Form W-2? Do the reimbursements for items that are not qualified medical expenses need to be included as taxable wages on employees’ Forms W-2?

A. If you have an HSA or an Archer MSA, distributions for expenses that are not qualifying medical expenses (including over-the-counter medicines and drugs purchased without a prescription) will be included in your gross income and subject to an additional tax of 20%. The income tax and additional tax are reported on Form 8889 for an HSA distribution and on Form 8853 for an Archer MSA distribution. You complete these forms and attach them to your Form 1040 when you file your income tax return. Distributions from an HSA or an Archer MSA are not included as taxable wages and do not affect your Form W-2.

 

 

 

 

I have nothing against contraceptives.  I have nothing against insurance convering contraceptives.  Heck, if it were up to me contraceptives would be mandatory for everyone with an income less than 3X the poverty rate.

 

I do believe however that having the federal government mandate it for an insurance provider is unconstitutional.  That's my issue with this.

 

You are probably right that it is a big of an overstep on the part of the government but I am curious regarding the legal argument.  I am assuming that the data published is correct (which it very well may not be) so my question is, can the argument be made that the government is making companies PAY for something that they have a moral objection to since (based on data which I cannot vouch for its validity) it actually results in no net change in cost or even a reduction in cost?

It may be true that it doesn't increase cost, or even reduces cost.  Our Constitution is clear, anything not explicitly outlined as a federal function is out of scope for our federal government.  If Alabama wants to do this well, that's not unconstitutional.

 

Do you believe the federal government should be able to require that all restaurants have chicken somewhere on the menu?  I know a LOT of vegetarian restaurants would be all up in arms about that even though it would probably increase revenue.  I would support them.

 

 

You claim to be the oracle of all things healthcare reform. I may be an ignorant detractor but I knew about this change without having to google it. We got a notice when it was time to reup her FSA.

Perhaps if you were to look for facts rather than cherry picking the first nugget that seems to support your incorrect assumption you wouldn't be so all fired in love with this disaster.

 

Whose the one cherry-picking to show the fallacies of Obamacare?  What percentage of Americans even contribute to an FSA or HSA?  I read an article that stated one of the reasons they reigned in the OTC drugs in these plans was because individuals on FSA's had this large amount of cash in their accounts at the end of the year, and because it was "use it or lose it" money, they raided their local pharmacies and bought 20 bottles of ibuprofen, 30 packages of Pepto Bismol or Acid Reducer, and a whole bunch of other OTC drugs to spend that money.  They also found people spending it on products non-related to medicine.  People dump money into these accounts with the lure that it'll save them tax dollars in the long run.  But they don't bother to manage them, and wait until the last minute to spend the money.  Before I determine how much I want to contribute, I look at what I spent the previous 3 years in prescriptions and other medicines.  I don't contribute more than 10% over that average.  As far as OTC drugs - I probably don't spend more than $300/year on those types of drugs.  It's easier for me nowadays to just pay for those items out of my pocket, than trying to keep up with a bunch of recipts to justify my purchases.  In the grand scheme of things, I'm only saving $10 - $20 by payiing for those products with my account anyways.

Way to go Bionic. When in doubt, change the argument.

What argument am I changing?  You're nit picking about a couple thousand tax-free bucks that probably 90% of current individuals who have health insurance don't use.  It makes logical sense to contribute to HSA's and FSA's, but most people see that as more descretionary income taken out of their paycheck every week that they can't use for anything else besides medical care.  When people barely have enough money to pay their bills, they don't want to stick money into an acoount that they may or may not use during the year.  I've listened to friends and co-workers who complain they have to make this mad dash at the end of the year trying to find some medical procedure, or go to the doctor to get some prescription for a "mysterious ailment" so they can burn the cash that's remaining in their FSA or HSA account.

 

Try looking at the overall bill, and see some of the positives that have come out in it - children up to 26 are able to stay on their parebnts insurance, no denial to cover pre-existing conditions, insurance pools for small businesses, various cost savings benefits for Medicare recipients.  The list goes on...