TIME Innovation

The Epic Scale of Lobbying Cash

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

These are today's best ideas

1. Corporations now spend more lobbying Congress than taxpayers spend funding Congress.

By Ezra Klein in Vox

2. Customer satisfaction and quality health care aren’t the same.

By Alexandra Robbins in the Atlantic

3. Here’s how manufacturers can cut costs and carbon emissions.

By Ken Silverstein in Forbes

4. Why is the U.S. condemned to have second-rate train service?

By Simon van Zuylen-Wood in National Journal

5. Scientists want to use lasers to shoot down space junk.

By Marissa Fessenden at Smithsonian magazine

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

MONEY Health Care

You May Still Have Time To Avoid the Health Law’s Tax Penalties

The tax-filing deadline may have passed, but it's not necessarily too late to get around the penalty for going without health insurance last year.

Even though the April 15 tax filing deadline has passed, you might be eligible for some health law-related changes that may save you money down the road.

•If you owed a penalty for not having health insurance last year and didn’t buy a plan for 2015, you may still be able to sign up for a marketplace plan, even though the open enrollment period ended Feb. 15. Many people who didn’t have insurance and didn’t realize that coverage is required under the law are eligible for a special enrollment period to buy a plan by April 30. If you sign up now, you’ll have coverage and avoid the 2015 penalty, which will be the greater of $325 or 2% of your household income.

•If you paid the penalty for not having insurance for some or all of last year and didn’t carefully check to see if you might have qualified for an exemption, it’s not too late. You can still apply for an exemption from the requirement by amending your 2014 tax return. It’s worth looking into since the list of exemptions is a long one. For example, if your 2014 income is below the filing threshold of $10,150—or $20,300 for a married couple—you don’t owe a penalty for not having coverage. Likewise if insurance would cost more than 8% of your income or if you’ve suffered financial hardships like eviction or bankruptcy.

•In February, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced that 800,000 tax filers who received a federal subsidy to help pay their insurance premium and used the federal health insurance marketplace received incorrect 1095-A tax forms. These forms reported details about the advance premium tax credit amounts that were paid to insurers based on the consumers’ estimates of income. They were then used to reconcile those payments against how much consumers should have received.

If you filed your taxes based on information that was incorrectly reported by the government on the form, you generally don’t have to file an amended tax return even IF you would owe more tax. But you may want to at least recalculate your return, says Tara Straw, a health policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

“You have the option to amend if it helps you,” she says. Unfortunately, the only way to figure that out may be to do the math on the tax form 8962 that you use to reconcile your income.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

MONEY Health Care

Why Young Millennials Are Turning Down Health Coverage at Work

150414_FF_MILLHEALTHCOVERAGE
Getty Images—Getty Images I don't need health insurance, boss. I've got my mom's plan.

Thanks to Obamacare, they can probably get cheaper health insurance from mom and dad.

New college grads want a job, but they can take or leave the health insurance benefits that come with it. Less than half of all eligible employees under age 26 enrolled in an employer-provided health plan in 2015, according to a new report out today from the ADP Research Institute.

But don’t worry about the rest. Under the Affordable Care Act, young adults are allowed to stay on their parents’ health insurance plan until they turn 26. And that’s probably what many are doing, says Chris Ryan, vice president of strategic advisory services at ADP. “There are lot of people who do value health coverage very much, but they want to stay on their parents’ plan as long as possible,” Ryan says.

Why Young Workers Have More Options

The provision that lets young adults keep their parents’ health insurance until age 26 has been one of the most popular parts of Obamacare. It was also one of the first provisions to go into effect. Between September 2010 and December 2011, more than 3 million adults aged 19 to 25 got private health insurance largely thanks to the ACA, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

A lot has changed since 2011. More millennials have entered the workforce, and a greater number have become eligible for health benefits. Today, 83% of employees under 26 are eligible for health insurance at work, up 8.5% from five years ago. Still, fewer millennials have actually enrolled in their employers’ plans. In 2011, almost 57% of young millennials who were eligible for employer-subsidized health coverage took it; this year, only 44% did.

One sign that many of these young adults are ditching their employer’s plans for their family’s plan: Once employees are too old to stay their parents’ plans, they’re much more likely to sign up for employer coverage. Three-quarters of eligible employees aged 26 to 39 enrolled in an employer health plan, the survey found.

Happily, after widespread concerns that young people would not sign up for health insurance, the vast majority are now covered one way or another. Nationally, 83.2% of Americans aged 18 to 25 now have health insurance, up from 76.5% in the last quarter of 2014, according to a recent Gallup poll. Today, there are 4.5 million more insured young adults who would not otherwise had coverage, according to the White House.

When Mom and Dad’s Plan Has the Edge

For millennials just starting out, however, health insurance premiums can still eat up a large part of their meager incomes. ADP found that employees earning $15,000 to $20,000 spent 9.5% of their annual income on premiums. Employees earning $45,000 to $50,000 devoted 5.8% of their income to premiums, while employees earning more than $120,000 spent just 2.3% of their income on premiums.

So even if young millennials have jobs with health benefits, the family plan is often the better deal. “Most millennials in their early 20s have entry-level salaries, so it’s attractive for our generation to get on a parent’s comprehensive plan for health and financial security,” writes Erin Hemlin, health care campaign director of Young Invincibles, a millennial research and advocacy group.

ADP found that individual premiums cost $486 a month, on average. But add two or more dependents to the plan, and premiums cost an average of $1,377 a month—which, split three or four ways, is less than an individual plan.

“There’s no question—it is usually cheaper for someone to be an additional dependent rather than pay for single coverage,” Ryan says. And then there are the tax benefits. “Because the premiums are on a pre-tax basis and parents are usually in a higher income bracket than their children, the parents are getting a better tax break, and the insurance overall is cheaper,” Ryan says.

Still, there are downsides to staying on a parent’s plan. If you don’t live near your parents, make sure you can find local doctors that are in your parents’ insurance network before you turn down health benefits at work. And consider if you want your bills and explanation of benefit statements mailed to your parents. Not sure what to do? Here’s more on how to decide— or shop for an individual plan on your own if you’re not getting coverage at work.

TIME Chris Christie

How Obamacare Makes Chris Christie’s Medicare Plan Possible

Chris Christie
Mel Evans—AP In this April 8, 2015 file photo, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie addresses a gathering as he announces a $202 million flood control project for Union Beach, N.J.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie would like to raise the age to qualify for Medicare, part of a bold plan to reform entitlements that he released Tuesday morning.

The proposal was greeted with cheers from many conservatives, but there’s a twist. The main reason that slowly raising the retirement age from 65 to 69 is politically feasible is a law that many conservatives hate: Obamacare.

That’s because working-class Americans who lose health insurance at work when they retire at, say, age 65, would instead be eligible to receive modest subsidies on insurance exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act. (Very low-income seniors could also sign up for Medicaid in some states or receive larger subsidies for coverage on the exchanges.)

“Obamacare soaks up the people who would otherwise be displaced by raising the eligibility age for Medicare,” said Avik Roy, a prominent Republican expert in health care policy who has argued that conservatives should use Obamacare to promote their own policies rather than repeal the law. “In the old days, if you raised the eligibility age for Medicare, then someone who is low-income at 65, but not eligible for Medicaid, are stuck in this gap, so what do you do?”

“But with [Obamacare], that safety net is there, so it’s much easier to raise the Medicare age,” added Roy.

But if retirees who, at 65, would have qualified for Medicare, which is relatively cheap, shift en masse to private insurance, which is relatively expensive, does Christie’s plan of raising the eligibility age actually save any money?

That answer has been hotly debated for years, since the cost of providing health care to 65-69 year-olds wouldn’t just disappear, it would shift to another part of the federal budget.

Some argue that it would save money, since the subsidies under the Affordable Care Act get smaller as seniors’ income rises, while Medicare serves seniors of all incomes the same.

“In general, raising the eligibility age for Medicare will save money for the federal government because seniors with relatively higher incomes wouldn’t be eligible for any other federal subsidies,” said Michael E. Chernew, a professor of health care policy at Harvard Medical School. “That’s the simple analysis.”

A 2011 Kaiser Family Foundation study estimated that raising the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 67 would save the federal government as much as $5.7 billion in the short term. But it could also cost 65- and 66-year-olds $3.7 billion in out-of-pocket expenses, and employers $4.5 billion in retiree health-care costs. (And that’s to say nothing of how the policy could negatively affect the cost of Medicaid and Medicare Part B premiums, according to the Kaiser study.)

Chernew added that raising the Medicare age comes with other, more complex ramifications, including the type and quality of care available, and whether such a policy would encourage more older Americans to remain in the workforce for longer. Another part of Christie’s plan directly incentivizes Americans to keep working past the age of 65 by eliminating the payroll tax for workers 62 and older.

But the broader question is whether conservatives want to make use of the Affordable Care Act to make their own changes to the health care system or whether they want to repeal the law and start from scratch.

Roy, who has advocated for “transcending Obamacare,” argues that that Christie’s policy proposal is a smart political play. “He’s staking out ground as a credible, bipartisan entitlement reformer,” he said.

MONEY Taxes

Last-Minute Tax Filers: Beware of This Obamacare Scam

pill bottles with money in them
Adrianna Williams—Getty Images

If you don’t have health coverage, you pay a penalty to the government. And scammers are ready to take advantage of that.

For all stripe of rip-off artist, tax season might as well be called open season. Scams are legion, and navigating a solution after the fact can be somewhere between maddening and negotiating an Iran deal that everyone likes. Last month the IRS issued a warning that received scant attention from the media, but nonetheless could impact millions of taxpayers this year — particularly targeting low-income, elderly and Spanish-speaking taxpayers.

The scam takes advantage of the Individual Shared Responsibility Provision of the Affordable Care Act. It’s a penalty, but one with many exemptions. Because it is somewhat complicated, the new provision has become the object of many fraudsters’ affections, especially during tax season.

This is the first year that taxpayers must confront this new liability. In the simplest of terms, if you don’t have health coverage, you pay a penalty to the government.

The provision is intended to induce people to get coverage, since individual shared responsibility is all about increasing the number of Americans enrolled in health insurance plans in order to enlarge the pool to spread risks and reduce costs. Regardless of what you think of that theory, that’s the informing principle.

So what is the penalty? While at first blush it doesn’t sound like a huge amount of money, it’s not nothing either — especially to a family who is forced to live paycheck to paycheck. It can be 1% of a family’s annual income (minus the tax return filing threshold for your filing status), with a maximum penalty being the national average cost of a bronze plan, or it can be calculated as $95 per adult and $47.50 per child under the age of eighteen, capping out at $285 for a family. The amount per adult will increase each year. In 2016, it will be $695 per adult and $347.50 per child, capping at $2,085 per family.

For an unscrupulous tax preparer the Shared Responsibility penalties can add up to quite a caper. How so? Because the scam involves A) taking advantage of the inherent complexity of the exemptions and B) pocketing the penalties. Sometimes the scammer claims he or she can reduce the cost of the penalty because they have created a pool for leverage, or they simply claim that paying them directly instead of the government is “how it’s done.”

The only thing you need to know is: That’s not how it’s done. The easiest way to avoid this scam is to remember one rule: Only pay the IRS. Period.

There is some good news. While you are required to report whether or not you have health care coverage on your tax return, the majority of filers will not have an issue here. It has been estimated that only four million of the estimated 30 million uninsured will have to pay the Shared Responsibility Provision in 2016. But here is where fraudsters see their honey pot, using complexity to fleece honest taxpaying citizens while exposing them to penalties when the IRS circles back to get money that was stolen from them.

Are you off the hook for paying the penalty? Here’s the list of exemptions to see if they might apply to you (consult your tax preparer as this column is not meant to serve as a substitute for professional tax advice):

  • There were no “affordable” options for you, because available annual premiums were in excess of 8% your household income.
  • You had a gap in coverage less than three consecutive months.
  • Your household income was below the return-filing threshold ($10,150 for an individual on a 2014 tax return).
  • You are not a U.S. citizen, a U.S. national, nor an alien lawfully present in the United States.
  • You belong to a health care sharing ministry.
  • You belong to a federally-recognized Native American tribe.
  • You are in a jail, prison or another qualifying institution — such as a psychiatric hospital, etc.
  • You belong to a qualifying religion existing prior to December 31, 1950, recognized by the Social Security Administration (SSA).
  • You qualify for a hardship exemption.

Hopefully it’s not news that you need to choose a tax preparer wisely. There are many fly-by-night operations that are literally gone in the blink of an eye the minute April 16th rolls around.

That said, most tax preparers work hard to get you the best possible refund (or the lowest possible amount due) while remaining scrupulous and sticking to the letter of the law—and that is no easy task given the complexity of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. If you are unsure about a tax preparer, you should ask for references or, even better, consult the IRS’s searchable database of tax preparers that are recognized by the agency.

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its partners.

More from Credit.com

This article originally appeared on Credit.com.

TIME Health Care

Obama on the Affordable Care Act’s Fifth Anniversary: ‘It’s Working’

White House Student Film Festival
Martin H. Simon—Pool/Corbis President Barack Obama hosts the second-annual White House Student Film Festival in the East Room of the White House, in Washington on March 20, 2015.

He challenged Republican critics who are campaigning on repealing the law.

President Obama had a simple message on the fifth anniversary of the Affordable Care Act: It’s working.

Speaking in the Executive Office Building next to the White House, Obama argued that his signature health care law was “working better than many of us — including me — anticipated” at increasing health insurance rates and improving the quality of care.

“The bottom line is this for the American people: this law is saving money for families and for businesses,” he said. “This law is also saving lives, lives that touch all of us. It’s working despite countless attempts to repeal, undermine, defund and defame this law.”

In particular, Obama highlighted a government report that showed that fewer mistakes in hospitals saved the lives of 50,000 people between 2011 and 2013, which the White House partly attributed to initiatives to reduce accidental overdoses, bedsores and patient falls.

The remarks came just two days after Texas Sen. Ted Cruz promised to repeal “every word of Obamacare” in a speech launching his presidential campaign, the first Republican to join the 2016 race.

Obama took the opportunity to take a few shots at Republican critics of the law, joking that “death panels, doom, [and] a serious alternative from Republicans in Congress” have all failed to materialize and challenging candidates campaigning for repeal to explain how “kicking millions of families off their insurance” will strengthen the country.

“Making sure that the Affordable Care Act works as intended to not only deliver access to care but to improve the quality of care and the cost of care, thats something that requires us all to work together,” he said.

MONEY Taxes

Why Obamacare Has Made Tax Filing an Even Bigger Headache This Year

piggy bank with band-aid on head
Getty Images

This is the first year that health reform crops up on your tax return. And a new study finds that many Americans who got help with health insurance premiums in 2014 now owe the IRS money.

This tax season, for the first time since the health law passed five years ago, consumers are facing its financial consequences. Whether they owe a penalty for not having health insurance or have to reconcile how much they got in premium tax credits against their incomes, many people have to contend with new tax forms and calculations. Experts say the worst may be yet to come.

When Christa Avampato, 39, bought a silver plan on the New York health insurance exchange last year, she was surprised and pleased to learn that she qualified for a $177 premium tax credit that is available to people with incomes between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level. The tax credit, which was sent directly to her insurer every month, reduced the monthly payment for her $400 plan to $223.

A big check from a client at the end of last year pushed the self-employed consultant and content creator’s income higher than she had estimated. When she filed her income taxes earlier this month she got the bad news: She must repay $750 of the tax credit she’d received.

Avampato paid the bill out of her savings. Since her higher income meant she also owed more money on her federal and state income taxes, repaying the tax credit was “just rubbing salt in the wound,” Avampato says. But she’s not complaining. The tax credit made her coverage much more affordable. Going forward, she says she’ll just keep in mind that repayment is a possibility.

It’s hard to hit the income estimate on the nose, and changes in family status can also throw off the annual household income estimate on which the premium tax credit amount is based.

Like Avampato, half of people who received premium tax credits would have to repay some portion of the amount, according to estimates by The Kaiser Family Foundation. Forty-five percent would get a refund, according to the KFF analysis. The average repayment and the average refund would both be a little under $800. (KHN is an editorially independent program of the foundation.)

Tax preparer H&R Block has also looked at the issue. It reported that 52% of people who enrolled in coverage on the exchanges had to repay an average of $530 in premium tax credits, according to an analysis of the first six weeks of returns filed through tax preparer. About a third of marketplace enrollees got a tax credit refund of $365 on average, according to H&R Block.

The amount that people have to repay is capped based on their income. Still, someone earning 200% of the poverty level ($22,980) could owe several hundred dollars, says Karen Pollitz, a senior fellow at the Kaiser Family Foundation. People whose income tops 400% of poverty ($45,960 for an individual) have to pay the entire premium tax credit back.

Experts say the message for taxpayers is clear: if your income or family status changes, go back to the marketplace now and as necessary throughout the year to adjust them so you can minimize repayment issues when your 2015 taxes are due.

Many people are learning about what the health law requires and how it affects them for the first time when they come in to file their taxes, says Tara Straw, a health policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. For the past 10 years, Straw has managed a Volunteer Income Tax Assistance site in the District of Columbia as part of an Internal Revenue Service program that provides free tax preparation services for lower income people.

Some of the recently initiated owe a penalty for not having health insurance. For 2014, the penalty is the greater of $95 or 1% of income. The H&R Block analysis found that the average penalty people paid for not having insurance was $172. Consumers who learn they owe a penalty when they file their 2014 taxes can qualify for a special enrollment period to buy 2015 coverage if they haven’t already done so. That would protect them against a penalty on their next return.

People may be able to avoid the penalty by qualifying for an exemption. Tax preparers rely on software to help them complete people’s returns, including the forms used to reconcile premium tax credits and pay the penalty for not having insurance or apply for an exemption from the requirement. For the most part, the software is up to the task, Straw says, but it comes up short with some of the more complicated calculations.

Case in point: applying for the exemption from the health insurance requirement because coverage is unaffordable. Under the health law, if the minimum amount people would have to pay for employer coverage or a bronze level health plan is more than 8% of household income they don’t have to buy insurance. That situation is likely to be one of the most common reasons for claiming an exemption.

But to figure out whether someone qualifies, the software would have to incorporate details such as the cost of the second lowest cost silver plan (to calculate how much someone could receive in premium tax credits) and the lowest cost bronze plan in someone’s area. The software can’t do that, so tax preparers must complete the information by hand.

“That one in particular has been vexing,” says Straw.

The gnarliest filing challenges may yet come from people with complicated situations, such as those who had errors in the IRS form 1095A that reported how much they received in premium tax credits, experts say.

Take the example of a couple with a 20-year-old son living at home who bought a family policy on the exchange. If midway through the year the son gets a job and is no longer his parents’ dependent, the family’s premium tax credit calculation will be off. The family needs to work together to figure out the optimal way to divide the credit already received between the two tax returns. The goal is to maximize the benefit to the family and minimize any tax credit repayment they may face.

“A lot of tax software is just not designed for that kind of trial and error,” says Straw.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

TIME politics

‘We Need to Get This Right': Obamacare Turns Five

Health Reform Cover
Cover Credit: PHOTO-ILLUSTRATION BY ANN ELLIOTT CUTTING FOR TIME. INSET: BRYCE DUFFY FOR TIME. The April 5, 2010, cover of TIME

The Affordable Care Act was signed on March 23, 2010

When President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act on March 23, 2010, it was obvious that making “Obamacare” official was still only the beginning of the law’s story. “Now for the really hard part,” TIME proclaimed in a cover story about the new law.

Looking back at that story by Karen Tumulty and Kate Pickert that announced the law’s arrival, it’s noteworthy just how tempered expectations were.

As TIME explained:

Economists and health care experts have long agreed on the problems that ail the health insurance system in America. It leaves too many people out. Even those who have coverage may be one diagnosis away from financial catastrophe. On the other side of that same equation lie the waste and excess created by paying doctors and hospitals for the quantity of treatment they provide rather than what works best. By some estimates, as much as 30% of the more than $2 trillion Americans spend on health care each year goes toward treatments that are unnecessary and even harmful. And what does the U.S. get for that staggering investment? Shining hospitals packed with cutting-edge technology but also a population whose health and life expectancy lag behind those of most other industrialized democracies.

Will these reforms turn all that around? We won’t know for years, probably not for decades. The most ambitious element of the new health care law–the expansion of coverage to an additional 32 million Americans–won’t even take effect until 2014. “It’ll take four years to implement fully many of these reforms because we need to implement them responsibly,” Obama said as he prepared to sign the legislation. “We need to get this right.”

The charts that accompanied the 2010 story included predictions for 2019. There number of uninsured Americans was predicted to drop by 28 million — from 50 million at the time of publication, to 22 million — during that time. If those changes happened steadily over the intervening nine years, about 15 and a half million Americans would have gained insurance in the first five years.

Just last week, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that about 16.4 million previously uninsured people have already gained insurance since the law was passed.

Read TIME’s 2010 cover story about the new health-care law, here in the TIME Vault: What Health Care Means for You

MONEY Health Care

Good News. Obamacare Hasn’t Led to Less Health Coverage at Work

"Benefits Meeting" announcement on bulletin board
Getty Images—(c) KLH49

A new survey finds that so far employers don't seem to be cutting worker hours to get out of offering health insurance benefits.

There has been much hand wringing over the health law requirement that large employers this year offer insurance to workers who put in 30 or more hours a week or face penalties for not doing so. The new rules would cost employers a bundle, some fretted, as part-timers clamored for company coverage previously unavailable to them. Others worried that employers would cut workers’ hours to get under the cap.

A new study found that so far there’s little cause for concern: Average enrollment in company plans was essentially unchanged between 2014 and 2015 at 74% of all workers.

The survey of nearly 600 employers by benefits consultant Mercer found that in 2015 the average percentage of employees who were eligible for coverage increased one point to 88%, but it was offset by a drop in the enrollment of eligible workers of one point on average, to 83%.

Part of the explanation for the stable results stems from the fact that most employers were already in compliance, says Beth Umland, Mercer’s director of research for health and benefits.

In 2014, employees had to work 25 hours a week on average to be offered health insurance, according to Mercer. That figure has edged up since 2011, when it was 23 hours weekly, but is still well below the law’s 30-hour threshold.

Still, while the expansion in eligibility wasn’t a big change for many employers, “if you were impacted you were really impacted,” says Tracy Watts, Mercer’s national leader for health care reform.

Food and lodging companies were most affected by the new rules, with the average percentage of workers who were eligible for coverage increasing from 57% to 60%. Other industry sectors that felt the change included health care, where per diem nurses and other professionals take on short-term assignments, and higher education, which employs many part-time adjunct professors, says Watts.

But most employers aren’t changing their practices to discourage health plan enrollment, the survey found. Seventy-three percent said they had no plans to change, while 16% said they ensured that newly hired part-timers work fewer than 30 hours weekly, and 19% said they reduced the hours of employees who consistently or occasionally worked more than 30 hours a week.

Even though the health law aims to encourage employers to offer coverage by imposing fines on those who don’t do so, not all take advantage of the offer. Workers might not sign up because they have other options under the health law. Low-income workers may be eligible for Medicaid in states that have expanded coverage to adults with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level. Young people can stay on their parents’ plan until they turn 26 under the health law, and many people continue to get coverage through their spouses.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com