Question 6:
The Supreme Court’s ruling on June 25, 2015 to preserve subsidies in states that have not established their own exchange brings upon several positive implications. One of the biggest implications from the decision is that there will now be broader access to healthcare coverage. This is because the IRS rule grants premium tax credits to individuals in all Exchanges, regardless of whether they are state-run or federally-facilitated. Also, since the Supreme Court’s decision upheld the IRS ruling, health coverage will now be more affordable as millions of people will get tax breaks. The tax credits available to residents in all states will especially be beneficial to low- and moderate-income residents to assist them in paying their …show more content…
If the subsidies and the mandates had been struck down in the other 34 states, many thought that the economic foundation of the ACA would have been undermined, putting the entirety of the legislation at risk.
The outcome of King v. Burwell could have been significantly different, greatly affecting the current healthcare system. If the challenge were successful the following events could have occurred:
• The ACA would have been destroyed, requiring a need for a renewed healthcare system and new legislation.
• More than 5 million Americans who obtained coverage through federal exchanges could have lost their tax credits and their health insurance coverage.
• Approximately 6.4 million Americans who were enrolled in a federal exchange and receiving a supplement would have lost the subsidy.
• The individual and employer mandates might have disappeared or been severely undermined in states with federal exchanges.
• Insurers would still have been required to cover all applicants regardless of pre-existing conditions, which could have destabilized the individual insurance markets in states with federal exchanges and could have led to rapid rises in premiums and the possible collapse of one or more
The Supreme Court’s ruling on June 25, 2015 to preserve subsidies in states that have not established their own exchange brings upon several positive implications. One of the biggest implications from the decision is that there will now be broader access to healthcare coverage. This is because the IRS rule grants premium tax credits to individuals in all Exchanges, regardless of whether they are state-run or federally-facilitated. Also, since the Supreme Court’s decision upheld the IRS ruling, health coverage will now be more affordable as millions of people will get tax breaks. The tax credits available to residents in all states will especially be beneficial to low- and moderate-income residents to assist them in paying their …show more content…
If the subsidies and the mandates had been struck down in the other 34 states, many thought that the economic foundation of the ACA would have been undermined, putting the entirety of the legislation at risk.
The outcome of King v. Burwell could have been significantly different, greatly affecting the current healthcare system. If the challenge were successful the following events could have occurred:
• The ACA would have been destroyed, requiring a need for a renewed healthcare system and new legislation.
• More than 5 million Americans who obtained coverage through federal exchanges could have lost their tax credits and their health insurance coverage.
• Approximately 6.4 million Americans who were enrolled in a federal exchange and receiving a supplement would have lost the subsidy.
• The individual and employer mandates might have disappeared or been severely undermined in states with federal exchanges.
• Insurers would still have been required to cover all applicants regardless of pre-existing conditions, which could have destabilized the individual insurance markets in states with federal exchanges and could have led to rapid rises in premiums and the possible collapse of one or more