Murphy's Law of Economics and Health Care [View article]
Some of the AFLAC type plans are also good supplements to "Chevrolet" coverage, John. They pay a fixed dollar amount directly to the insured. I am watching the life/health insurance companies. A flu pandemic coupled with a public health plan option where the government is a direct writer is a double whammy.
Murphy's Law of Economics and Health Care [View article]
These are mechanical issues that could be easily rectified so that the employer doesn't have any exposure, and the employee doesn't risk losing his contribution at year end, if the state insurance departments allowed it. (There's the rub!) Thanks for explaining the reason.
On Oct 26 12:23 AM doubleguns wrote:
> OG it goes both ways. If your FSA allows you to fund and spend $2000 > per year. You could spend it all in january and then you have the > entire year to fund it back. Your employer would have put the money > up in January since you had not put the $2000 in. However if you > left the company in February and had recieved your $2000 check you > would not owe anything. That would come out of the employers pocket. > That is why they get to keep anything left over at year end. > > That is also why I wont offer an FSA to my employees. A small employer > could never take those kinds of hits.
Murphy's Law of Economics and Health Care [View article]
Where I reside now, you can open an HSA, take out a personal insurance policy with a larger dedectible, fund the deductible from your HSA, roll over unspent amount into the next year, and not spend it unless and until you are ill. If you wish, you can later convert it to an IRA. It's a no brainer. I had an FSA in another state, sponsored by an employer. This was not as effective because the account had to be emptied by year end, or went to the employer. Why the employer got the funds when they were paid by the employee is beyond me, but that is how it was structured. Given the opportunity, much better products could be designed without government intervention.
Murphy's Law of Economics and Health Care [View article]
Murphy's Law of Economics and Health Care [View article]
On Oct 26 12:23 AM doubleguns wrote:
> OG it goes both ways. If your FSA allows you to fund and spend $2000
> per year. You could spend it all in january and then you have the
> entire year to fund it back. Your employer would have put the money
> up in January since you had not put the $2000 in. However if you
> left the company in February and had recieved your $2000 check you
> would not owe anything. That would come out of the employers pocket.
> That is why they get to keep anything left over at year end.
>
> That is also why I wont offer an FSA to my employees. A small employer
> could never take those kinds of hits.
Murphy's Law of Economics and Health Care [View article]
It's a no brainer.
I had an FSA in another state, sponsored by an employer. This was not as effective because the account had to be emptied by year end, or went to the employer. Why the employer got the funds when they were paid by the employee is beyond me, but that is how it was structured.
Given the opportunity, much better products could be designed without government intervention.
Pension Underfunding: The Next Earnings Shock? [View article]