Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

Hagel's Deep Cuts for Military Announced

0
0
Hagel's Deep Cuts for Military Announced On Monday, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is expected to release his proposal for severe cuts in the nation’s military, which will leave the U.S. Army with its smallest force since World War II. The cuts are expected to include the removal of the entire fleet of Air Force A-10 attack jets, reduce the U.S. Army from 490,000 troops to between 440,000 to 450,000, impose a one-year freeze on the salaries of general and flag officers; limit the increase of basic pay for military personnel to 1 percent, retard the growth of tax-free housing allowances for military personnel, and reduce the $1.4 billion direct subsidy which is given to military commissaries in order to lower the prices for soldiers. Eleven navy cruisers will be sent into reduced operating status. Some military retirees will see an increase in health insurance deductibles and co-pays.

All of these plans are derived from Barack Obama’s determination to backtrack from the war footing adopted after the 9/11 2001 terror attacks. Pentagon officials admit that the traditional American posture of being capable to fight wars on more than one front has been softened so that if such an occasion occurred, success would take more time, there would be more casualties, and enemies would be emboldened.

One senior pentagon official said, “You have to always keep your institution prepared, but you can’t carry a large land-war Defense Department when there is no large land war.” Other officials added that the plan is designed to follow Obama’s national security directives.

Opposition is expected from some members of Congress, the National Guard Association, veterans’ organizations, and defense-industry officials.

 
 
 
  Reported by Breitbart 7 hours ago.

Arkansas lawmakers to vote on funds for alternative to Obamacare

0
0
Arkansas lawmakers to vote on funds for alternative to Obamacare By Steve Barnes

LITTLE ROCK (Reuters) - Arkansas lawmakers will try once again to provide funding this week for the state's Private Option medical insurance plan that has drawn interest from other states' lawmakers, who see it as an alternative to Obamacare.

The Arkansas Senate approved the $915 million appropriation for the Private Option plan last week, but the House narrowly rejected it in four votes.

House Speaker Davy Carter, a Republican and a Private Option supporter, has expressed confidence that funding will eventually be secured. The House will probably vote on the bill on Monday, and every day after that until it passes, he said.

The program uses federal Medicaid funds from the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, to help buy health insurance coverage for low-income Arkansans, many of whom would otherwise be assigned to Medicaid or have their treatment costs absorbed by doctors and other healthcare providers.

This appeals to some conservative lawmakers who want to provide healthcare for the uninsured and believe a private-sector option makes more sense than enrolling more people in the federal Medicaid program.

It also fits into the plans of the Obama administration, which would like to see states use federal Medicaid money to provide some form of insurance for lower-income residents.

Both houses in the Arkansas legislature are controlled by Republicans, who are opposed to Obamacare and divided on whether the Private Option is a reasonable alternative.

The program, crafted by Republican legislators who worked with Governor Mike Beebe, a Democrat, was enacted last year.

"Republican governors and Republican states and anti-Obamacare and anti-federal government healthcare folks are saying, 'Gosh, we need to do what Arkansas is doing'," Beebe said in a Reuters interview last week.

The Arkansas experiment has since been adopted or considered for use in some form by several other states, including Republican strongholds such as Utah, and battleground states in presidential elections, including Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio.

'NO-BRAINER'

"Pragmatic folks have said, 'We may not like it, we may have voted against it, but as long as we've got it, let's take care of our own people'," Beebe continued.

"From pure arithmetic, it's pretty much a no-brainer."

But opponents in the Arkansas General Assembly said that both the Private Option and the Affordable Care Act would prove financially disastrous and represent an unacceptable expansion of government.

State Representative Nate Bell, a Republican from Mena, Arkansas, and a leading opponent of the Private Option program, answered "both" when asked if conservative opposition to the plan was fiscal or philosophical.

Bell, who voted against the program in 2013, advocates passing the appropriation this year, but only after attaching amendments that he says could make it easier for the financing to wither in the 2015 legislative session.

Bell's language strips from the funding bill all money for outreach - advertising and marketing intended to increase enrollment in the Private Option - that its advocates say is important to broadening participation and holding down costs.

The Democratic governor and the program's legislative advocates have accepted that the amendments may be the price they have to pay to win the additional Republican votes needed to keep it funded.

Beebe has warned that failure to continue the Private Option would destroy his proposed $5 billion budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 because the savings the program anticipates would compensate for millions of dollars in state tax cuts that Republicans demanded in 2013.

Last week, the 100-member House fell about five votes short of the 75 votes needed to continue funding.

"It boils down to Obamacare,"said state Senator Larry Teague, a Democrat from Nashville, Arkansas, and the co-chair of the legislature's powerful Joint Budget Committee.

Legislation with "any connection at all" to Obama's signature healthcare law is enough to doom it among some Republicans, Teague said.

(Reporting by Steve Barnes; Writing by Jon Herskovitz; Editing by Jan Paschal)

Join the conversation about this story »

 
 
 
  Reported by Business Insider 5 hours ago.

Crowdfunding Health Innovation: Disruptive Companies And Funders Meet To Change Health Delivery

0
0
Two of the most significant pieces of legislation in decades, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act, are poised to transform the entire spectrum of health care. The ACA regulates everything from health insurance requirements to tax collection. The JOBS Act regulates businesses that fund their ventures online. In tandem, these two bills have created a new world for health care innovators and investors. Ironically though, it is the innovators and investors who are joining forces to do what the ACA is unable to do: reduce costs and increase access. At the 7th Annual OneMedForum last week in San Francisco more than 400 one-on-one investor meetings were conducted between venture capitalists and startup health care companies, all in the name of disruptive innovation. Reported by Forbes.com 3 hours ago.

Jeep Wrangler Sport is Least Expensive Car to Insure; Ohio Has Lowest Auto Insurance Rates

0
0
Insure.com’s annual study reveals the most and least expensive vehicles and states for car insurance.

Foster City, CA (PRWEB) February 24, 2014

If you’re looking for an insurance bargain, consider a Jeep. And if you live in Ohio, you’re enjoying the lowest average car insurance rates in the nation.

Insure.com’s annual study pinpoints the most and least expensive vehicles to insure and ranks the states for insurance premiums. Average insurance rates for 855 vehicles can be found in an easy-to-use tool at Insure.com. All results can be accessed through Insure.com’s car insurance comparison page.

In this year’s rankings of 2014 models, Jeep snagged a remarkable seven of the 20 “least expensive to insure” spots. Despite the adventurous spirit conveyed by Jeeps, their low rates are a reflection of safe driving and low claims rate by Jeep owners.

The most expensive 2014 vehicle to insure is aptly nicknamed “Godzilla” for its high performance and lightning-fast speed. The Nissan GT-R Track Edition carries the highest average premiums in the nation. The GT-R reaches not-so-legal speeds in a blur, where small driving mistakes lead to expensive claims. The GT-R is also a monster to repair: The carbon fiber material used in its body panels generally can’t be repaired after a crash – it has to be replaced. Even a minor accident in the GT-R can result in an expensive claim.

The average rates below are for a 40-year-old single male driver with a good record. See the full methodology at the bottom.

THE LEAST EXPENSIVE 2014 CARS TO INSURE

Rank/Make & model/Average annual premium

1. Jeep Wrangler Sport - $1,080
2. Honda Odyssey LX - $1,103
3. Jeep Patriot Sport - $1,104
4. Honda CR-V LX - $1,115
5. Jeep Compass Sport - $1,140
6. Chrysler Town & Country Touring - $1,140
7. Subaru Outback 2.5i - $1,144
8. Dodge Journey SE - $1,149
9. Honda Odyssey EX - $1,149
10. Dodge Grand Caravan SE - $1,158
11. Jeep Patriot Latitude - $1,161
12. Ford Escape S - $1,170
13. Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo - $1,171
14. Jeep Wrangler Sahara - $1,172
15. GMC Acadia SLE-2 - $1,185
16. Chevrolet Traverse LS - $1,188
17. Toyota Sienna L - $1,190
18. Hyundai Santa Fe Sport - $1,194
19. Accord Sport - $1,209
20. Jeep Wrangler Rubicon - $1,209

THE MOST EXPENSIVE 2014 CARS TO INSURE

Rank/Make & model/Average annual premium

1. Nissan GT-R Track Edition - $3,169
2. BMW M6 - $3,065
3. Mercedes-Benz CL550 4Matic AWD - $3,019
4. Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG GT - $2,986
5. Porsche Panamera Turbo S - $2,970
6. Audi R8 5.2 Spyder Quattro - $2,917
7. Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG - $2,887
8. Audi A8 L 6.3 Quattro - $2,869
9. Jaguar XKR Supercharged - $2,854
10. Jaguar XK - $2,610
11. Mercedes-Benz GL63 AMG - $2,609
12. Porsche Panamera 4S - $2,598
13. Audi S8 Quattro - $2,598
14. Porsche Panamera S - $2,597
15. Mercedes-Benz CLS550 4Matic AWD - $2,582
16. BMW 650i - $2,544
17. Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG - $2,507
18. BMW 640ix - $2,484
19. Audi R8 V10 Quattro - $2,448
20. Mercedes-Benz GL550 4Matic AWD - $2,438

“Family cars generally have the lowest auto insurance premiums,” said Amy Danise, editorial director of Insure.com. “People ferrying kids are always the safest drivers, and that holds down rates on popular family vehicles. What we’ve seen over the last few years of this study is that SUVs are replacing minivans as the family vehicle of choice.”

Insure.com’s study also includes state rankings of car insurance rates. The results are calculated by averaging the rates of all 855 vehicles surveyed for each state, from the cheap Jeeps to the expensive sports cars. Michigan tops the state rankings this year, followed by West Virginia and Georgia.
Drivers in Ohio, Maine and New Hampshire benefit from the lowest auto insurance premiums in the nation.

THE MOST EXPENSIVE STATES FOR CAR INSURANCE IN 2014

1. Michigan
2. West Virginia
3. Georgia
4. Washington, D.C.
5. Rhode Island

THE LEAST EXPENSIVE STATES FOR CAR INSURANCE IN 2014

47. Iowa
48. Idaho
49. New Hampshire
50. Maine
51. Ohio

(Access the full state rankings through Insure.com’s car insurance comparison page.)

“In each state, auto insurance rates are a mix of many ingredients, most of which consumers can’t control,” said Danise. “Urban areas, traffic conditions, state insurance laws, competition among insurance companies, the percentage of uninsured drivers and natural disasters all swirl together to influence rates – sometimes in unsavory ways.”

Michigan, for example, at No. 1, has a notorious law that guarantees unlimited lifetime benefits to those injured in car accidents. Auto insurance companies pay the first $530,000 for every case. In addition, Detroit has sky-high insurance rates and many uninsured drivers, which affect the state average.

“But you can control your own driving,” said Danise. “A record that’s free of tickets and accidents helps hold down your premiums. Every time you get behind the wheel, you can ‘save money’ on your future insurance bills by paying attention to the road and other drivers.”

Access all 2014 study results at http://www.insure.com/car-insurance/car-insurance-comparison/.

Methodology
Insure.com commissioned Quadrant Information Services to calculate average auto insurance rates for 2014 models. Averages were calculated using data from six large carriers (Allstate, Farmers, GEICO, Nationwide, Progressive and State Farm) in 10 ZIP codes per state. Not all models were available, especially exotic cars. More than 850 models are included in the 2014 study.

Averages are based on full coverage for a single 40-year-old male who commutes 12 miles to work each day, with policy limits of 100/300/50 ($100,000 for injury liability for one person, $300,000 for all injuries and $50,000 for property damage in an accident) and a $500 deductible on collision and comprehensive coverage. This hypothetical driver has a clean record and good credit. The rate includes uninsured motorist coverage.

State averages were calculated by averaging the rates for all 855 models surveyed for each state.
Average rates are for comparative purposes only. Your own rate will depend on personal factors.

About Insure.com
Insure.com provides a comprehensive array of information on auto insurance, home insurance, health insurance, and life insurance. The site offers an extensive library of originally authored insurance articles and decision-making tools that are not available from any other single source, including its extensive car insurance discounts tool. Insure.com is owned and operated by QuinStreet, Inc. (NASDAQ: QNST), one of the largest Internet marketing and media companies in the world. QuinStreet is committed to providing consumers and businesses with the information they need to research, find and select the products, services and brands that best meet their needs. The company is a leader in visitor-friendly marketing practices. For more information, please visit QuinStreet.com.

Twitter: @InsureCom
###

Press contact:
Amy Danise
860-386-6446
adanise(at)insure(dot)com Reported by PRWeb 5 hours ago.

Your Money Adviser: Choosing Health Coverage as Deadline Nears

0
0
If you don’t have health insurance, there is still time to enroll through the public marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act. Reported by NYTimes.com 4 hours ago.

John Dingell Retiring After Nearly 60 Years In Congress

0
0
WASHINGTON -- Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) is retiring from Congress after 59 years.

Dingell will make the announcement Monday at a luncheon in Downriver, Mich., according to the Detroit News.

"I’m not going to be carried out feet first," he told the paper. "I don’t want people to say I stayed too long."

Dingell is the longest-serving member of Congress in U.S. history, first coming to the House on Dec. 13, 1955 at the age of 29. He succeeded his father, John Dingell Sr., in a special election that year and went on to win a full term in 1956. Since then, he has been reelected 29 times. He is also one of two remaining World War II veterans in Congress; the other is Rep. Ralph Hall (R-Texas).

Dingell officially became the longest-serving member on June 7, 2013, when he was feted by colleagues in both parties and by President Barack Obama for the milestone. Over the past five decades, he has worked with 11 presidents, served with 2,419 House colleagues and cast more than 25,000 votes.

The Michigan Democrat will leave behind a legacy of hallmark legislation impacting civil rights, the environment, health care and workers' rights. He presided over the passage of Medicare in 1965, and he wrote the Endangered Species Act, the 1990 Clean Air Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. He was the lead author of the Affordable Care Act, the Patient's Bill of Rights, the Children's Health Insurance Program and the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. He has also been a staunch defender of the U.S. auto industry.

Dingell served for years as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, arguably the most powerful committee in the House. During his tenure, he subpoenaed top administration officials under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and led oversight hearings that exposed corruption in various government agencies. One of his investigations uncovered $600 toilet seats at the Pentagon.

"We emptied the top leadership of the EPA," Dingell told Newsweek in 2006. "We put a large number of FDA people in jail."

He lost his chairman post to Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) in 2008, though he was given the title of Chairman Emeritus in honor of his years leading the committee.

Dingell hasn't had much trouble getting reelected over the years, receiving less than 62 percent of the vote just twice when Republicans swept the House in 1994 and 2008. He didn't even have a GOP opponent in 1988 and 2006. Still, it nearly cost him his election early on when he came out in favor of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He told the Associated Press that the Wall Street Journal gave him a "one in 15 chance" of winning the race that year.

Dingell already knew his way around the halls of Congress before his first House run. He was a congressional page from 1938 until 1943. He joined the Army in 1944 and later attended Georgetown University, where he graduated with a chemistry degree and eventually a Juris Doctor. He worked as a lawyer in private practice until 1955, when his father passed away and he decided to run for his House seat.

Between Dingell and his father, the two have represented the southeastern Michigan area for more than 80 years. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

UnitedHealth Lifts Dow on Prospect for Lower Medicare Reimbursement Cuts

0
0
The health insurance giant is helping the Dow today, even as telecom stocks fall. Find out the latest for the Dow.
 
 
 
  Reported by Motley Fool 2 hours ago.

Who's the true 'top conservative on Twitter' – and does it matter for 2016? | Ana Marie Cox

0
0
The GOP struggles with the social media generation, but a few are starting to figure it out, especially Governor Chris Christie

It's no secret that the GOP has been playing catch-up to the massive social media machine built by Obama campaign for years. (The Romney campaign's deficiencies in that regard were well-documented.) As the Republican party grapples with the large-scale demographic shifts ahead, we thought it might be revealing to see how the 2016 GOP frontrunners have approached the more granular social media. Social media interactions, after all, are much more like old-fashioned politicking than they are like "messaging": too much polish works against you, humor is at a premium, and the real skill isn't convincing people so much as working the crowd. So it makes sense to us to ask who's winning the Twitter Primary.

There's more to social media than Twitter, of course. But as the political class grows more and more desperate for metrics to measure a race that hasn't even begun, it makes sense to turn to Twitter: that's where the journalists hang out, so that's where a candidate's image will or won't get the extra spit shine that only comes with being very good at this very new form retail politics.

Our field, in order of total number of followers (analytics from Twitonomy and Twtrland):

*1. Donald Trump @realdonaldtrump *

- 2.5m followers
- Following: 43 (Notable: Steven Tyler, Magic Johnson)
- 16.4 tweets per day
- Most re-tweeted post: "Stop congratulating Obama for killing Bin Laden. The Navy Seals killed Bin Laden. #debate"
- Most frequently used hashtag: #trump2016
- Most mentioned user: @realdonaldtrump
- Percentage of feed devoted to direct responses: 21%
- Does he actually write the posts? Almost certainly. No employee could have skin so thin.

- Typical tweet: Quoting something nice someone else said about him or a promotion of a Trump-branded property.



"@tnaps85: If Donald Trump is our next president, America will be saved-ith and all will be well in the world. Amen and alleliua" True!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 22, 2014

- *He said what?*



Always leave your ego at the door during negotiations. Remember, it's only business and there will always be another day!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 29, 2014



One gets a sense of what The Donald's feed is like just from the numbers: egocentric (he's his own most-mentioned user and tweets four times as much as other possible nominees) and delusional ("#trump2016"). He has a miniscule follower-to-following ratio, suggesting that he uses Twitter almost solely as a broadcast medium … and to see what people are saying about him. His high response rate is misleading: a good portion of his "responses" are manual re-tweets of praise from obscure corners of the Internet (see above). The rest of his responses are attacks on media outlets that have criticized him.

*2. Senator Marco Rubio @marcorubio*

- 504k followers
- Following: 3k (Notable: lefty outlet @salon and, for real, @ipricku, a "piercing, modification and jewelry company")
- .79 tweets per day
- Most re-tweeted post:



#GOPResponse #SOTU #gop #tcot pic.twitter.com/3hxtgdbP

— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) February 13, 2013

- Most frequently used hashtag: #sayfie (for The Sayfie Review, a Florida political news aggregator)
- Most mentioned user: @barackobama
- Percentage of tweets that are responses: 9%
- Does he write the posts? Maybe not the itinerary-driven ones announcing appearances and endorsements, but the ones about sports and various religious holidays are so boring and earnest they have to be by the boss. An employee would try harder.

- Typical Tweet: Subject-verb-object-level simple agenda items or sports commentary. Least exciting live-tweeting of Miami Heat games you'll ever read. "Testified today about need to prevent #obamacare #bailout".

- *He said what?*



I actually like the new @MiamiDolphins logo. pic.twitter.com/vvCMKWux1K

— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) March 28, 2013



Rubio's Twitter feed is appropriately safe and people-pleasing, a perfect reflection of Rubio's chosen path to the nomination: Don't cause too much of a scene, attract just enough attention to show how humble you are… and mercilessly attack Barack Obama from every possible angle. He shows an occasional awe-shucks-style self-effacing sense of humor but mostly sticks to non-controversial topics. That Rubio follows a body-modification salon suggests someone in his office has a sense of humor but I'm not sure it's Rubio.

*3. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie @govchristie*

- Followers: 426K
- Following: 568
- Tweets per day: 4.6
- Most re-tweeted post:



If conditions are not safe on Wednesday for Trick or Treating, I will sign an Executive Order rescheduling #Halloween.

— Governor Christie (@GovChristie) October 30, 2012

- Most mentioned user: @govchristie (second: @springsteen)
- Percentage responses: 27%
- Does he write the posts? Unlikely. I imagine they'd be more entertaining if he did – indeed, the posts often are just links to video clips of Christie being Christie. His charm does not, perhaps, translate very well to the abbreviated Twitter form. The feed is, however, in keeping with Christie's personality – or at least its best parts: expansive, good-natured, service-oriented. Senator Cory Booker may have started the trend of Twitter-as-bat-signal, but Christie carries it on: he responds directly to users who ask about road closings and repair work.

- Typical Tweet: At home watching this snow fall? Send your pics! #PAX #NJSnowDay

- *He said what?*



In a choice between being with my wife on her birthday or Senator Rand Paul, I choose my wife. http://t.co/PWNciI0SBy

— Governor Christie (@GovChristie) September 3, 2013



Don't let the loose and friendly feel of Christie's feed fool you: there is a tight hand on the reins, which is most obvious in how successful Christie has been in avoiding any kind of Twitter awkwardness. There are few regrettable re-tweets and no controversies, unless you count his being friendly Obama a controversy. It's a masterful display of discipline cloaked by nonchalance, which may be the essence of Christie's success. No wonder he was the popular guy in high school: you have to want to win without ever looking like you're trying too hard.

*4. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul @senrandpaul*

- 398k followers
- Following: 325 (Notable: Kevin Spacey, James Woods)
- 1.6 tweets per day
- Most re-tweeted post:



. @BarackObama sent 7 security guards to #WWIIMemorial this AM to keep out our vets. Sadly, that is 2 more than were present in Benghazi.

— Senator Rand Paul (@SenRandPaul) October 2, 2013

- Most frequently used hashtag: #tcot ("top conservatives on Twitter")
- Most mentioned user: @FoxNews
- Percentage responses: 5%
- Does he write the posts? Again, he may not type up and send out his own schedule items, but the feed itself is exactly as idiosyncratic and passionate as Senator Paul has shown himself to be otherwise, right down to his 2013 Festivus "airing of grievances." (Fellow Senator Cory Booker offered to participate in the traditional "feat of strength") He is given to dramatic rhetorical flourishes that a staffer would probably not risk.

- Typical tweet: No one, no matter how wise, can determine the "correct" price of bread without a marketplace.

- *He said what? *



Turtle tunnels. Squirrel sanctuaries. Look it up.

— Senator Rand Paul (@SenRandPaul) December 23, 2013



Paul's feed is worth following just for fun, a rare quality in the political Twittersphere. Though his low response percentage makes it seem like he's using Twitter to mainly to broadcast, like Trump, the replies he does make seem like genuine attempts at conversation, if not debate (he is most likely to engage with @reason, a Libertarian magazine). The Festivus celebration was borderline brilliant, a clever way to repackage GOP whining as a pop culture event.

*5. Texas Senator Ted Cruz @tedcruz*

- 233k followers
- Following: 19k (Notable: Jimmy Kimmel)
- 5.4 tweets per day
- Most re-tweeted post:



Retweet if you want answers! #SOTU #MakeDCListen pic.twitter.com/gxphn9WA3O

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 29, 2014

- Most frequently used hashtag: #txsen
- Most mentioned user: @tedcruz
- Percentage responses: 9%
- Does he write the posts? Cruz is so stiff and mannered in person, it could be that his dutiful Twitter feed is just a genuine reflection of his personality. But I suspect he delegates actual tweeting to staff (a sure sign of this: most of his tweets come from the desktop application Tweetdeck rather than a mobile device). There are spurts of legitimate cleverness, though they have the same homework-y feel as the endorsements and announcement of media appearances. Likes to hi-jack ancient memes for random assaults on Obama. "You keep using that word".

- Typical tweet: Retweet if you or someone you know lost their health insurance or faces higher premiums because of #Obamacare

-* He said what? *



We are grateful for the rich history the Jewish culture brings to the US & world. I hope you have a blessed Hanukkah http://t.co/kgjX5RGpfx

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) November 27, 2013



If Rubio's feed is careful, Cruz's is tightly wound: it adheres to a consistent combination of personal promotion interspersed with reproach and mocking of the Obama administration. I would not be surprised if there was a bot doling out the posts to a specific formula, right down to the very occasional mention of his family (they exist!). Perhaps the most bizarre thing about Cruz's feed is what's not on it: he makes almost no mention of sports – not even college football, which is as close to a state religion as Texas has. He does have a lot of pictures of himself hunting. (In Iowa, no less!) Cruz's preference for solo shooting over the communal experience of team athletics is a pretty good metaphor for his political career, if anyone's looking for one.

*Who's the winner in the top conservative on Twitter race?*

Governor Chris Christie. To my mind, the hands-down leader in the Twittocracy is the same one that's at the top of the polls. He doesn't have the most followers of the top tier candidate, but he does have the highest interaction percentage – over a quarter of his tweets are replies to those who have tweeted at him. What's more, he leads field in both the proportion of tweets related to policy or governance and in "personal" tweets—his most active days have been when he's either solicited pictures of New Jersians "snow days" or when he's used to Twitter to parse out policy announcements. His showy bipartisanship and service-y alerts buttress the same image that has, until recently, made him such an appealing candidate overall. The cute animal pictures also don't hurt. Reported by guardian.co.uk 2 hours ago.

New Fed Study Says Health Reform Can Reduce Financial Stress, Bankruptcies

0
0
One of the great hopes of health care reform is that it will reduce the number of Americans who file for bankruptcy because of medical debt. A new study in Massachusetts is providing evidence that the reform law passed in that state in 2006, and which served as the model for the Affordable Care Act, is indeed making a significant dent in bankruptcy filings.

The study, conducted by economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, found that the Massachusetts reform law, often called RomneyCare after then GOP Gov. Mitt Romney, has reduced personal bankruptcies in the state by 20 percent.

In no other country in the developed world is medical debt a leading cause of personal bankruptcy. But in the U.S. it is the leading cause, a phenomenon even FoxBusiness News highlighted in a report last week.

Citing a 2013 study by NerdWallet Health, an online service that helps people make more informed health care decisions, FOX reported that unpaid medical bills were the number one cause of bankruptcy filings in this country, surpassing both credit card and mortgage debt.

Fox quoted bankruptcy lawyer Mazyar Hedayat as saying that, "Starting in about 2007/2008, medical expenses went from being a primary component of a lot of cases to becoming the dominant factor."

The NerdWallet Health study findings were consistent with previous research conducted by the Commonwealth Fund and other organizations. A study released in 2008 by the Commonwealth Fund found that an estimated 72 million Americans between the ages of 19 and 64, or 41 percent, said they had trouble paying for medical care in 2007. That compared to 58 million, or 34 percent, just two years earlier.

The Federal Reserve of Chicago researchers found that the Massachusetts reform law, which reduced the rate of uninsured residents from 8.4 percent in 2006 to 3 percent in 2012, has helped in many ways to improve the financial well-being of Bay Staters. In addition to reducing bankruptcies, the law also helped improve credit scores and reduce overall debt.

"We find that the Massachusetts reform improved financial outcomes across many dimensions," Federal Reserve researchers Bhashkar Mazumder and Sarah Miller wrote. "It improved credit scores, reduced delinquencies, lowered the fraction of debt past due and reduced the incidence of personal bankruptcy." Reduction in large delinquencies of over $5,000 was "particularly pronounced," they wrote.

The Wall Street Journal's MarketWatch quoted MIT economics professor Jonathan Gruber as saying that the Federal Reserve study supported similar findings in other parts of the country. He cited a report in the Quarterly Journal of Economics that showed "enormous reductions in financial stress" among Oregon residents who became insured after the state broadened access to coverage in 2008.

One of the ways that both the Massachusetts reform law and the Affordable Care Act can benefit family finances is that they both limit the amount of money folks have to spend out of pocket if they get sick or injured. Under the Affordable Care Act, for example, the maximum out-of-pocket limit for any health plan offered on the state and federally operated health insurance exchanges is $6,350 for an individual and $12,700 for a family.

While that's still a lot of money for the majority American households -- median household income in this country was just $51,371 in 2012, according to the U.S. Census Bureau -- it still represents a significant improvement. Prior to the ACA, insurance companies were able to sell policies that had no out-of-pocket maximums. I saw policies when I was in the industry that had $50,000 annual family deductibles. Insurers can no longer market health plans with such exorbitant out-of-pocket requirements.

While the reforms enacted in Massachusetts and Washington are helping, other researchers, including Dr. Stephanie Woolhandler, professor of public health at Hunter College in New York, warn that the laws will by no means end medical bankruptcies. Woolhandler and her fellow researcher Dr. David Himmelstein, both advocates of a single-payer health care system and founders of Physicians for a National Health Program, have done significant research on medical debt. Woolhandler has expressed concern that while the ACA will reduce the number of people without insurance, it might increase the number of people who are under-insured. That's because many people likely will enroll in plans that have relatively low premiums but high deductibles. Even with the out-of-pocket caps under the ACA, many folks will still rack up medical debt if they get seriously sick or injured.

Nevertheless, the Federal Reserve research is encouraging. "These results show that health care reform legislation has a strong effect not just on health and the use of health services, but across many measures of household well-being," the researchers concluded.

That's a big step in the right direction. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.

Is the Future of Hispanic Broadcast Television Up in the Air?

0
0
Hispanics are among the most enthusiastic consumers of information, news and entertainment in the United States today. They value reliability, accuracy and most importantly, access.

To many of these families the high cost of monthly basic cable and satellite TV packages are beyond their means. As a result, they turn to broadcast television for their favorite shows, community news and critical updates during emergencies. In fact, 51 percent of the 59.7 million of Americans who rely on free, over-the-air broadcast TV live in homes where Spanish is the language of choice.

This wasn't always the case. Just five years ago, Hispanic broadcast networks and local television stations were struggling to increase their viewership in cities with the largest Latino populations - New York, Miami and Los Angeles.

Today, cities such as Houston, Dallas, San Diego, San Antonio, Phoenix and Denver are home to thriving Hispanic TV stations that deliver hit shows such as "Corazón Indomable". And in July 2013, Univision Network ranked number one ahead of all the English-language broadcast networks.

There is no question that the 43 percent demographic growth in the U.S. Latino population during the past decade has greatly influenced consumer preferences and trends in the video marketplace.

Stations are rising to the challenge to meet the needs of Hispanic viewers as a trusted source of information and community partner.

Many local stations have led public campaigns to raise awareness of issues such as the importance of Latino representation in the Census 2010 count, voter registration drives and information about the Affordable Care Act and access to health insurance. For example, Univision in partnership with Entravision Communications, NCLR and other national organizations, launched the "ya es hora ¡CIUDADANIA!" campaign as a call to action for eligible Latinos to start the path to naturalization.

Empowering the communities they serve is an important role not only for local broadcast stations, but also for beloved television figures such as María Elena Salinas and Jorge Ramos. Many of these TV-personalities have pushed strongly for passage of immigration reform.

These examples affirm the key contributions that local broadcasters provide in offering quality programming, serving as a critical lifeline for local news and serving as community advocates.

Preserving access to this content on the public airwaves and ensuring a system that continues to invest in this type of programming well into the future is critical to the Hispanic community. But in the debate over retransmission fees between cable providers and broadcast networks, the important voice of the Latino consumer has been lost.

Our community needs to know that big cable and satellite TV providers like Time Warner, DirectTV and DISH aren't settling for just loading consumers up with skyrocketing equipment rental costs and early termination fees on their monthly bills. They are trying to persuade Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in Washington to create new laws that would allow them to dictate prices for what millions of Hispanic TV viewers watch every day.

These pay-TV providers claim that the "retransmission fees" that broadcasters receive to produce local channels on cable and satellite TV are disproportionately driving up consumers' monthly bills. Yet, they fail to mention that the compensation broadcast networks and local TV stations receive is significantly lower than what cable companies charge their customers.

While asking for Washington's help, consumer cable bills continue to rise faster than the rate of inflation. In fact, many of these yearly increases occurred well before pay-TV providers were paying local broadcasters to retransmit local TV signals on their cable systems.

No need to wonder why more and more consumers are cutting the cord, fleeing pay-TV services, and relying on free over-the-air broadcast TV.

Retransmission fees help ensure the viability of America's local TV stations and support broadcasters' ability to create and air the most widely watched television programming in the nation.

With each passing day, Americans are becoming increasingly frustrated with rising cable and satellite TV bills, manufactured pay-TV blackouts and early termination fees (ETFs) that limit consumer choice, particularly during service disruptions when consumers want to drop their pay-TV service.

In the end, big cable and satellite TV providers don't care if some American consumers can't afford to pay for their service, they'll bank on future price hikes that gouge their current customers and increase their record profits at the expense of US consumer and local broadcast TV stations.

If big pay-TV succeeds in effectively killing the vital retransmission fees that broadcasters rely on to provide quality local programming, we risk losing our Hispanic broadcasters and the valuable and important local programming they provide to tens of millions of Hispanic TV viewers throughout America.

Gus West is Board Chair and President of The Hispanic Institute (THI), a Washington, D.C.-based organization dedicated to providing meaningful policy debate and analysis on issues important to the Hispanic community. Reported by Huffington Post 57 minutes ago.

Medicaid Expansion Ads Target Nebraska As Red States Weigh Obamacare Benefits

0
0
With more red states moving toward adopting the expansion of Medicaid under Obamacare, a Democratic-leaning group is targeting a series of radio ads at one that could actually do it: Nebraska.

The spots by Americans United for Change contrast Gov. Dave Heineman's (R) request for a new $3.3 million state plane with his refusal to pay the state's relatively minor share of the cost to expand Medicaid.

A bipartisan bill to expand Medicaid and cover an additional 54,000 Nebraskans is pending in the legislature, but it is several votes short of the 33 needed to break a procedural hurdle. The 33 votes would also be enough to override a veto if Heineman were to reject the measure.

"Gov. Heineman says he needs a new private plane to do his job," says the ad, which targets reluctant GOP state senators in districts where many constituents would benefit from the expansion. "The price tag? $3.3 million, courtesy of the Nebraska taxpayers. Heineman says Nebraska can afford to fly him around in style –- but then says we can’t afford to expand Medicaid to keep our rural hospitals from going under."

The comparison to the cost of the plane may not be entirely fair, since the legislature shares the blame for holding up the expansion.

But the larger point is true. According to a Kaiser Family Foundation study, Nebraska would have to increase its Medicaid spending by about 1.8 percent over the next decade, spending an extra $25 million or so a year, while the federal government would kick in more than $3 billion. And there would be no additional cost to the state for the first three years.

Groups representing rural hospitals in Nebraska warn that without expanding Medicaid, many hospitals could be in danger of failing. And county lawmakers note that counties (and therefore local taxpayers) are required to pay for the cost of uncovered medical care.

At a hearing last month on the bill to expand Medicaid, Lancaster County Commissioner Deb Schorr said her county pays $2.1 million a year in general medical assistance and $700,000 for community mental health services. Or, a little less than the cost of a plane for the governor.

The ads serve two functions. They're designed to help more people get health insurance, but as red states begin embrace the non-partisan aspects of the Affordable Care Act, they also take some of the string out of purely partisan attacks on President Barack Obama's signature law. Reported by Huffington Post 46 minutes ago.

How to Get a Subsidy to Pay for Health Insurance

0
0
How to Get a Subsidy to Pay for Health Insurance Filed under: Health Care, Family Money, U.S. Government, Health Insurance, Financial Education

*Joe Raedle/Getty*The Leading Insurance Agency in Miami has been helping Floridians enroll in health insurance plans through the Affordable Care Act.

By Lisa Greene-Lewis

The clock is ticking toward the March 31 deadline when most uninsured Americans will be required to purchase health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.

If you don't have health insurance you may be eligible for financial assistance from the government called a subsidy or premium assistance tax credit to help pay for health insurance.

Here are some answers to common questions about health insurance subsidies:

*What exactly is a subsidy or premium assistance tax credit?*

A subsidy or premium assistance tax credit can be applied to your monthly insurance premiums to help you pay for your health insurance when purchased through the health insurance marketplace. You can also choose to take the assistance as a tax credit when you file your 2014 taxes in 2015.

*Who is eligible for a subsidy?*

If you purchase health insurance through the online federal or state health insurance marketplace, then you can apply for a subsidy to help you pay for your health insurance. You can find more specific information about the marketplace and look up health plans in your state by visiting healthcare.gov.

Uninsured lower to middle income individuals under age 65 who aren't eligible for other insurance coverage through their employer, Medicaid or Medicare may qualify if they purchase coverage through the health insurance marketplace.

Your eligibility is generally determined by your household income and family size. The lower your income, the larger your tax credit.

*What are the income requirements to qualify?*

Income requirements are based on the federal poverty guidelines and household size. If your household income is less than 400 percent of the federal poverty level,
which for 2013 is $45,960 for an individual and up to $94,200 for a family of four, then you may be eligible for a subsidy.

The internal revenue service will report your income from your previous year's tax return to the health insurance marketplace for you. When you fill out an application for a subsidy using the online exchange, you will also be asked about your current income situation to determine eligibility and how much of a credit you may receive.

If your 2014 income is lower than estimated when you applied for a subsidy, you may receive an additional tax credit when you file your 2014 taxes in 2015. Conversely, if your 2014 income is higher than estimated when you received your subsidy, you may have to pay back some of the subsidy when you file your 2014 taxes in 2015.

*How much money will I receive?*

Your contribution is determined on a sliding scale from 2 percent of household income for individuals under 133 percent of federal poverty level to 9.5 percent of household income for people between 300 to 400 percent of the federal poverty level.

Your subsidy amount is the difference between your expected contribution and the cost of the benchmark health insurance plan.

For example, a family of four with a household income of about $47,000 (roughly 200 percent of the federal poverty level) will have to contribute $47,000 x 6.3 percent (or $2,961) on their health plan. If their health insurance policy is $9,200, their subsidy will be about $6,239 ($9,200 - $2,961).

*How do I get the subsidy?*

If you choose to get the premium tax credit or subsidy in advance, the government sends the money directly to your health insurance company on your behalf. Your health insurer credits that money toward your cost of health insurance premiums, which decreases how much you'll pay each month.

If you don't choose to have your subsidy help pay for your health insurance, you can receive it as a tax credit on your 2014 taxes when you file your taxes in 2015.

*What happens if I don't buy insurance?*

Individuals who don't purchase health insurance for themselves or family by the March 31 deadline will have to pay a fee of $95 per adult and $47.50 per child or 1 percent of your annual household income (whichever is greater). The amount of the fees will increase each year. However, some individuals are exempt from paying the penalty. To find out if you qualify for an exemption, visit healthcare.gov/exemptions.

--------------------

-*More from U.S. News*-

· A Consumer's Guide to 'Obamacare'
· How Much the Health Insurance Penalty Will Cost You
· To Cover Medical Bills, the Uninsured get Creative

--------------------

 

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments Reported by DailyFinance 36 minutes ago.

Shumlin signs mid-year budget adjustment bill

0
0
SOUTH BURLINGTON, Vt. (AP) — Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin has signed into law a mid-year budget adjustment bill that increases funding for Medicaid by more than $7 million, but achieves nearly that much in savings on the state employee health insurance plan.
 
 
 
  Reported by Boston.com 5 hours ago.

Narrow Health Care Provider Networks: Boon or Bane?

0
0
Some health plans sold through the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) health insurance marketplaces use "narrow networks" of providers. That is, they limit the doctors and hospitals their customers can use. Go to Doctor A or Hospital A and the plan will pay all or most of the bill. Go to Doctor B or Hospital B, and you may have to pay all or most of the bill yourself.

The narrow network strategy emerged long before the ACA, during the managed care era in the 1990s, and insurance companies and large, self-insured employers have used them ever since to control health care costs. In fact, for the first time, the ACA creates new consumer protections requiring that insurers provide a minimum level of access to local providers. A number of states have exceeded these federal standards using their discretion under the new law.

Nevertheless, some consumer advocates and ACA critics still find narrow networks objectionable. Narrow networks mean that some newly insured people are no longer covered for visits to previous providers, or, if they didn't have a doctor before, are limited in their new choices. Not infrequently, narrow networks exclude the most expensive doctors and hospitals in a community, including some specialists and academic health centers. More expensive doctors and hospitals are not necessarily better, but for patients with a rare or complex health problem, such restrictions can be problematic.

Welcome to the world of competition in health care, because that is what narrow networks are about. Narrow networks are used by competing plans to control health care costs, and perhaps improve quality as well. In fact, if you don't like narrow networks, you're saying, in effect, that you don't like competitive solutions -- as least under current market conditions -- to our health system's problems.

The competitive logic behind narrow networks goes like this: ACA marketplaces require that qualified health plans with comparable actuarial value (at platinum, gold, silver and bronze levels) display their costs side by side in online insurance marketplaces. This makes it easier than ever before to make apples-to-apples comparisons among health plans, and creates unparalleled pressures on insurance companies to keep their prices down so as to attract new customers.

In the past, insurers often kept prices down by limiting benefits or cherry-picking healthy customers. The ACA takes these options off the table. As noted, within any of the four categories, health plans must offer roughly comparable benefits. And the ACA prevents plans from excluding consumers with pre-existing conditions or increased health risks. The result is that to compete on price, insurance companies must control the costs of the care their customers use.

This is great in theory, but enormously difficult in practice, especially for most private insurance plans. High prices charged by providers are a major reason for high costs. Medicare and Medicaid use their regulatory authority to set prices, and providers really can't object because these public programs have such large market shares that many doctors and hospitals can't get along without them. But individual private insurers lack the market power in most communities to negotiate better prices, and banding together to increase their clout would violate antitrust laws.

Narrow networks are a partial solution to private insurance companies' dilemma. Plans contract selectively with doctors and hospitals who charge lower prices or have a track record of treating episodes of illness less expensively. Narrow networks also give private insurers more market clout. By guaranteeing their chosen caregivers a certain volume of business, health plans acquire the leverage to negotiate better prices in future contracts.

Some plans also use quality metrics to ensure that less costly providers have comparable or better quality. Thus, the quality of care in narrow networks may be equal to or better than the care patients receive in unrestricted plans.

If the narrow network approach sounds familiar, it should. This is what virtually every company in every other industry does every day to the acclaim of its customers, Wall Street, and many critics of narrow networks. Picking low-cost suppliers that meet quality standards is the key to business success the world over.

The controversy around narrow networks throws into bold relief a much broader debate about the roles of competitive and non-competitive solutions to our nation's health care problems. Most other countries in the developed world control health care costs and prices the way Medicare does. Government, or an agent of government, negotiates provider reimbursements that meet national cost goals. Consumers then have pretty much unrestricted choice of provider.

In the U.S., such centralized regulatory solutions are anathema, except in the case of Medicare. But so, it seems, is the pain that private competition inflicts on patients, who, to great public consternation, find they can't use the doctor or hospital they want.

Government may respond to the narrow network controversy by further regulating private insurers' contracting practices. Whether this will succeed in providing more relief to consumers, while controlling costs, remains to be seen.

But one thing is clear: Competition in health care sounds like a good idea. But when its effects surface, the public reacts as if health care is a right, not just another one of those gas grills or wide-screen TVs that line those long aisles at your local retailer. Reported by Huffington Post 5 hours ago.

Try this weird tax trick that can pay off 3 ways

0
0
*Try this weird tax trick that can pay off 3 ways*

Young adults are signing up in greater numbers for the new state health insurance marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act, although still not in numbers that proponents had hoped for. But here's another reason to act: With a bit of savvy, a younger worker—or for that matter, anyone with a relatively modest income—can boost retirement savings, cut federal and state income taxes, and save on premiums, all at once. If you’re not in that demographic but are close to someone who is, you can help.

The trick is to reduce reported income. With the new exchanges, a premium subsidy kicks in for those with income 100 percent to 400 percent of the federal poverty level. For individuals in 2014, the ceiling for subsidies will be $45,960; for a family of four, $94,200. The subsidy is essentially a new kind of refundable tax credit. You can use it now to pay for coverage or apply it to your 2014 federal tax return, which you'll file in 2015. (Consumer Reports provides a free health tax credit tool to help you figure out how big a tax credit/subsidy you're eligible for.)

With some exceptions, those who can afford coverage but don’t buy it must pay a fine when filing 2014 taxes; for individuals, it’s 1 percent of income or $95, whichever is higher. (The fine rises yearly to a maximum of 2.5 percent of income or $695 per person, whichever is higher, in 2016; after that it’s adjusted for inflation.)

To determine subsidy eligibility, the marketplaces consider an individual’s or household’s estimated 2014 modified adjusted gross income (MAGI). In this insurance calculation, MAGI is similar to adjusted gross income (AGI), but adds tax-exempt interest back in, as well as the income and housing cost of a citizen or resident living abroad, and the nontaxable portion of Social Security income that normally isn’t part of the AGI calculation.  

You can deduct a number of items from MAGI, including college tuition, student-loan interest, pretax money put into health savings accounts and individual retirement accounts, and other expenses and deductions available to self-employed people. As you’ll see here, you can also reduce your MAGI with contributions to 401(k)s and other qualified retirement accounts.

Consider a 28-year-old single man in California with a MAGI of $23,000 a year, no employer-based coverage, and low expected use of medical services. In Covered California, that state’s marketplace, the lowest-priced “silver” policy with Anthem Blue Cross—considered middle-of-the- road coverage—would cost him $1,356 a year, with a subsidy of $1,836.

Contributing $2,000 to a traditional IRA would reduce his MAGI to $21,000. At that level, he’d pay $1,056 for coverage, saving $300 a year and gaining a higher subsidy for out-of-pocket costs. Assuming income-tax rates are stable between 2014 and 2013, he’d also save $300 in federal taxes and $71 in California state taxes. You could view the total $671 in savings as reducing his premium to $685.

Lower- and middle-income workers who contribute to traditional IRAs, 401(k)s, and other qualified retirement accounts are also eligible for the federal savers credit. It’s 10 percent to 50 percent of the first $2,000 contributed. For tax-year 2013 it was available only to single workers with AGI of $29,500 or less, and couples with AGI of $59,000 or less (limits are slightly higher for 2014). In this example, the credit is $200. That brings his effective cost of insurance to $485 a year.

The savers credit applies to Roth accounts, too. Those after-tax contributions won’t lower MAGI or current taxes, or improve health insurance subsidy eligibility. But distributions are tax- and penalty-free after age 59 1⁄2, which could mean major benefits over traditional retirement accounts.

What if, instead of investing in an IRA, our worker contributed $2,000 to a 401(k) with an employer match? His savings would be the same as if he had contributed to an IRA. But a typical match of, say, dollar for dollar up to 6 percent of income would add $690 to his retirement savings. That’s not money directly in his pocket, but it effectively makes his insurance free.

Many at that salary range might not want to sacrifice 9 or 10 percent of income toward retirement savings. That’s where the help comes in, if you can afford it. If he agrees to contribute the $2,000, you offer to reimburse him all or some of that amount. Not only would you be helping him do the right thing for his health, you’d be improving his prospects for a healthy retirement.

— Tobie Stanger

This article also appeared in the January 2014 issue of Consumer Reports Money Adviser.

*Consumer Reports has no relationship with any advertisers or sponsors on this website. Copyright © 2006-2014 Consumers Union of U.S.*

*Subscribe now!*
Subscribe to *ConsumerReports.org* for expert Ratings, buying advice and reliability on hundreds of products.
--------------------
Update your feed preferences
   
   
   
   
    Reported by Consumer Reports 4 hours ago.

Bill would allow Conn. exchange to negotiate

0
0
Connecticut lawmakers are considering a bill that would allow the state's health insurance marketplace, Access Health CT, to negotiate prices with the insurance companies selling products through the exchange. Reported by ajc.com 5 hours ago.

8 Ways to Save on Taxes in 2014

0
0
By Paula Pant, WiserAdvisor contributor

Nobody enjoys paying more in *taxes* than they should. And most people understand that the best way to optimize their taxes is by learning as much as they can stomach about the tax code.

But there's just one problem: Tax law changes constantly. Old provisions expire. New deductions and credits are created. How can anyone keep up with all the changes?

We can't give you an ultra-comprehensive summary of IRS codes within a single article, but we can point out a handful of *tax laws* that should be near the top of your radar.

The following eight tips might help you save on taxes in 2014.

*#1: Maximize Your Retirement Accounts*

This is a timeless classic: One of the best ways to save on taxes is by maximizing your retirement account limits.

During tax year 2013 (the year for which you'll be filing in April 2014), qualified individuals ages 49 and under can contribute $17,500 into a 401(k) or 403(b) account and $5,500 into an *Individual Retirement Account*, or IRA.

Qualified individuals ages 50 or older can contribute $23,000 into a 401(k) and $6,500 into an IRA.

That means qualified people can defer taxes on $23,000 to $29,500 of their income, depending on their age. That can add up to a huge tax savings.

Remember: You can retroactively make prior-year contributions to your 401(k) and IRA until tax filing day. In other words, you have until April 15, 2014 to make contributions against your 2013 limits.

*#2: Weigh Traditional vs. Roth*

Check with your financial advisor to determine whether you should shelter your taxes immediately (through a traditional IRA) or whether you should pay income tax upfront, in exchange for an exemption from capital gains and dividend taxes when you withdraw your earnings in retirement (through a Roth IRA).

There's no single "best" answer to the traditional vs. Roth question -- it will depend on your age, tax bracket and assumptions about the future -- so talk to your CPA and financial advisor to determine which one is better for you.

*#3: Maximize Health Savings Accounts*

In 2013, a qualified person aged 54 or under in a high-deductible health plan could contribute $3,250 into their individual Health Savings Account (HSA) or $6,450 into their family-plan HSA.

If you're 55 or older, you can contribute an additional $1,000 on top of those limits.

Your deadline to make these contributions is April 15, 2014, and this amount -- like your 401(k) -- is also tax-deferred.

*#4: Buy Health Insurance*

Under the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, commonly called "Obamacare," the deadline to purchase health insurance is March 31, 2014 -- prior to the tax-filing deadline.

Any individual who doesn't carry health insurance by that deadline will face a tax penalty. (Individuals are permitted to purchase an insurance policy through any qualified entity -- not just the official federal health care exchanges.)

That tax penalty amounts to 1 percent of your household income, or $95 per adult and $47.50 per child, up to a $285/family maximum -- whichever is higher.

You won't pay that penalty when you file your 2014 taxes, though. Instead, you'll pay the bill when you file for 2015. But be cautious: This is one move you'll need to make in 2014 to help you reduce your future tax payments.

*#5: File Jointly as a Same-Sex Married Couple*

In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Two months later, in August, the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department issued a statement announcing that any same-sex couple that's "legally married in jurisdictions that recognize their marriages" will be given tax treatment as a married couple.

In other words: If you're part of a married same-sex couple, you can now file taxes jointly (or as "married filing separately," if you choose.)

This may allow you to recognize tax savings in a number of areas, including personal exemptions, claiming a dependent, making IRA contributions, claiming the child tax credit or the earned income tax credit, and itemizing deductions.

Furthermore, if you purchased health insurance for your same-sex spouse through your employer, the money that you spent on premiums is now qualified as tax-deductible, just as it is for opposite-sex married couples.

Here's one more way to save on taxes: If you were legally married during tax years 2010, 2011 or 2012, you can file an amended tax return as a married couple. This could potentially allow you to claim bigger deductions, which allow you greater tax savings.

Hurry to file these -- particularly the 2010 amended return -- before the 3-year statute of limitations expires.

*#6: Claim a Home Office Deduction*

In prior years, many people avoided claiming a home office deduction because the process felt cumbersome.

Starting January 1, 2013, however, that process became a lot easier.

Qualified freelancers, contractors and business owners can now claim a flat home office deduction of $5 per square foot, up to a maximum of 300 square feet. (In previous years, you had to maintain actual records of the cost of maintaining that home office space.)

Employees who work-from-home can also claim the deduction if they exclusively use the space "for the convenience of (their) employer."

*#7: Write-Off Your State and Local Sales Tax*

Do you itemize your taxes? If so, you have the choice between writing off your state and local income taxes or the sum total of the state and local sales taxes that you paid in 2013.

Talk to your CPA to decide which of these two options will give you a larger deduction.

*#8: Deduct the Cost of Moving to Your New Job*

Did you accept a new job in 2013? If so, congratulations.

If you're like many Americans, you might have needed to move more than 50 miles from your previous home in order to accept this new position -- and that means the cost of moving may be tax-deductible.

If you drove your car, for example, to your new town or city, you can deduct 24 cents per mile, plus parking and tolls. If you flew, you can deduct the cost of airfare and lodging while traveling from your former home to your new one.

Two snippets of good news: This tax deduction is available to people who claim the standard deduction (who don't itemize.) And it's also available to self-employed individuals who move to a new location to run their own business. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

Pan-American Life Insurance Group gets earnings boost from acquisition, Latin American growth

0
0
It's been nearly a decade since Jose Suquet took the helm at Pan-American Life Insurance Group with a mission to refocus a company that had veered from its core mission of providing health insurance and employee benefits across Latin America. Suquet says a years long effort to streamline and grow the New Orleans-based company is starting to bear fruit. Reported by nola.com 4 hours ago.

Can A Doctor Really Can Demand An Extra $75 Up Front?

0
0
Changing health insurance rules mean confusion for patients and providers alike. But laws do protect people from having to pay more than what's specified in their health plan. Reported by NPR 4 hours ago.

Judge Orders Obamacare Insurers in Louisiana to Accept HIV Funds

0
0
A U.S. district court judge in Louisiana has temporarily barred Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Louisiana and two smaller insurers from rejecting payments from a federal program intended to help low-income HIV patients buy health insurance. Reported by Newsmax 2 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images