Retirees Pre 65 - Who have had to go back to work post ACA?

[Smitty77_7]

I now know over 8 people that I worked with in my aerospace career, that have had to go back to work due to the much higher Post ACA cost of insurance. None of these 8 are full timers, but a few own RV's and get out and about on trips. Out of these 8, 2 of them are over 62 and have started to take Social Security. So they're now also impacted the limits of income on top of SS. Only 3 have been able to return as contractors in their former fields, with proportional compensation to prior to when the retired. Most are at department/home depots/lowes, walmart, etc. type jobs.

 

(This is a group that meets together on a regular basis, having played bridge together for several decades. I'm not in the group that plays bridge, but joined them for a 60th birthday party for one of the gang.)

 

I also know of many other Pre 65 aerospace retirees, that have greatly altered their plans in retirement in relation to travel, paying for grandkids schooling, and or helping towards college, home improvements, planned recreational dining/movies/plays - etc., etc. Having to as one of them put it 'circle the wagons' around their budgets, to make it to 65 when Health Care Insurance costs should drop tremendously. (Between 250-350 of us meet quarterly for a retirees luncheon, and one of the old finance analyst was doing this informal data gathering, and asked me about how we have been impacted. Less travel, holding off on new carpet and other minor remodeling, and much less recreational dining out along with box wine, and other related reductions in our spending budgets, to cover our hire Health Care Insurance costs - was my answer to him.) He did not have a full count yet, but he said it looked like at least 50% of the Pre 65 fellow retirees that he had talked with, had also had to make budget cutbacks and shifts, to cover the much hire cost for Health Insurance.

 

(And please note, all but a very few of these, retired like I did, before the full impact of ACA hire costs on Health Care were known. A big shock to many, to say the least.)

 

This is a very small group in Southern California. So I wanted to ask this group if they too are seeing this trend, and know of:

 

1) Pre 65 retirees that have had to go back to work due to cover the costs of Health Insurance?

 

--- and/or ---

 

2) Pre 65 retirees that have had to greatly alter their budgets to cover Health Insurance?

 

We see much about those that are in states that did not expand Medicaid, and the 'coverage gap'. We also see many millions that now have coverage that did not have coverage before. And many millions that have subsidized coverage. Heck, in some states they make commercials beating the drum on how great all of this is. And, I remain positive that more people are now able to get insurance. And glad that the 'coverage gap' is being talked about. (Good info on this in another thread under Sharing the Full time Lifestyle, with some informative articles and graphs too:)!)

 

What I have not seen, is any graphs ore numbers or articles that cover the impact to of higher costs to many millions of other employed, and or Pre 65 retirees, and it's overall impact on both lives, as well as the overall economy? (May have missed them, but as everyone I talk to, including those that work for mostly private companies/corporations, as well as those I shared informal info on above - have all commented about the impact on their spending habits - I'm curious...)

 

Appreciate any info sharing on this. Why? To balance out the full store of our new post ACA country. And if Congress ever does decide to roll up their sleeves to address those in the 'coverage gaps', that they also try to stop the budget bleeding and impact to the Pre 65 retiree group too. (If this is not known, and well identified as also being a SNAFU - good chance it will not be addressed, and could possibly be made worse.)

 

And in full fairness, my view and interests and questions have been very focused on the Pre 65 group - as it pertains to me. Perhaps their are other great positives that I've not yet seen, and would welcome that info sharing too. (And yeah, no pre existing and no caps - are pretty dang positives, so know they exist:)!).

 

Best to all,

Smitty

[Daveh]

Smitty, Are you saying that they are falling in the gap or that thier income exceeds the amount to qualify for a subsidy? As I understand it, a couple loses eligibility for subsidy at about $40,000.00.

 

In our case the exact opposite was true, we hit the road this year because, with my having a preexisting condition, we could actually both afford and be assured of having insurance. If the ACA is revoked, I will go back to work just for health insurance.

 

I just read an article today (which of course I cannot locate) stating that a large percentage who consider the ACA too expensive are either not applying, or not applying correctly, for subsidies. One thing I have mentioned before is that the subsidies are not based on gross income but your modified adjusted gross income. This creates planning opportunities wherein people can shield or defer their income and live off savings. For instance take all your income and max out your IRA and a Health savings account. This effectively raises the subsidy cut off level to $60,000.00. Also people can invest retirement funds in things with capital appreciation where they will not need to recognize the income until after 65. This also certainly is a strong reason to look at deferring social security or pension income to the extent possible.

 

By the way, you may want to do an edit. Pretty sure you meant "make budget cutbacks and shifts" rather than shits:-).

[richfaa]

Did they not have pensions from their employer or employer provided health insurance that they could, carry over into retirement??,

[DuffMan]

ACA initiated wealth transfer = Smitty to Daveh

 

That's how it was designed to work.

[mkc]

Did they not have pensions from their employer or employer provided health insurance that they could, carry over into retirement??,

 

We did not, and both of us worked for MegaCorps. Pensions and employer-provided health were long gone when we did early retirement. At best we got COBRA for something like 12-18 months. Even my mother, who initially received retiree health insurance due to being over 65, lost that when her Megacorp changed their retiree benefits. Now she buys a Medicare supplement on her own.

[chindog]

I'm a pre-65 retiree, having retired just this year. I was quite shocked when my former employer told me just before I retired they were raising the rates for pre-65 retirees to stay with the company health care plan, due to the requirements for calculating premiums under the AFA. In my case, the premium cost to me would have been an increase of about 600% from what I was paying as an employee. My health care insurance would have been about 218% more than my pension. I simply could not afford that. So, I had to go to the exchanges for health insurance. What I wound up with was a policy with a much higher deductible and a higher total out of pocket cost for a much higher monthly premium than my cost as an employee. Since this year my income is very low, with only my pension and a modest investment income, I have been able to get a subsidy through healthcare.gov. Next year, I will begin drawing social security benefits, so my income will go up. My subsidy will decrease, and at the same time, my health care plan premiums are increasing by about 1/3, and the deductible is going up as well. Unless my wife or I come down with a catastrophic illness with extreme medical bills, we would be better off with no insurance in 2016. We won't meet the deductible, and will be paying thousands of dollars in premiums with no assistance from the insurance company, other than reduced fees that are negotiated with the providers. There are no catastrophic health care plans offered for the county where I live, so I am forced into paying a lot for health insurance that is difficult to afford. Otherwise, having no insurance at all invokes paying a fine, and risking the "death panel" decisions for those with no insurance.

 

I can see how people who are in that pre-65 health care insurance twilight zone are forced back into employment. It could happen to us, too.

[Al F]

So are any of you suggesting we do away with ACA and just go back not being able to get insurance or paying much, much more than what what insurance costs through ACA?

[richfaa]

 

We did not, and both of us worked for MegaCorps. Pensions and employer-provided health were long gone when we did early retirement. At best we got COBRA for something like 12-18 months. Even my mother, who initially received retiree health insurance due to being over 65, lost that when her Megacorp changed their retiree benefits. Now she buys a Medicare supplement on her own.

I understand that but none of that was a result of the ACA.?????

[richfaa]

I'm a pre-65 retiree, having retired just this year. I was quite shocked when my former employer told me just before I retired they were raising the rates for pre-65 retirees to stay with the company health care plan, due to the requirements for calculating premiums under the AFA. In my case, the premium cost to me would have been an increase of about 600% from what I was paying as an employee. My health care insurance would have been about 218% more than my pension. I simply could not afford that. So, I had to go to the exchanges for health insurance. What I wound up with was a policy with a much higher deductible and a higher total out of pocket cost for a much higher monthly premium than my cost as an employee. Since this year my income is very low, with only my pension and a modest investment income, I have been able to get a subsidy through healthcare.gov. Next year, I will begin drawing social security benefits, so my income will go up. My subsidy will decrease, and at the same time, my health care plan premiums are increasing by about 1/3, and the deductible is going up as well. Unless my wife or I come down with a catastrophic illness with extreme medical bills, we would be better off with no insurance in 2016. We won't meet the deductible, and will be paying thousands of dollars in premiums with no assistance from the insurance company, other than reduced fees that are negotiated with the providers. There are no catastrophic health care plans offered for the county where I live, so I am forced into paying a lot for health insurance that is difficult to afford. Otherwise, having no insurance at all invokes paying a fine, and risking the "death panel" decisions for those with no insurance.

 

I can see how people who are in that pre-65 health care insurance twilight zone are forced back into employment. It could happen to us, too.

" Death panel"