Page 34 - 2019 Washington DC Trip Packet

be smarter consumers and less apt to get treatment that is unnecessary, or
which could be obtained at a lower cost.” (CNBC, 10-1-15)

Arguments Against the Tax: Implementation of the Cadillac Tax would
permanently alter the American health care coverage landscape.
Employer-provided coverage is the backbone of our health care system
and the primary source of coverage for most Americans. More than more
than 181 million Americans receive health care coverage through an
employer.

If the tax were enacted, many employers would be forced to curtail benefits
and increase workers’ out-of-pocket costs to get under the Cadillac Tax
threshold. Even the threat of implementation could lead to the effects, as
employers are being forced to prepare for the tax’s impact.

The Cadillac Tax is already causing an adverse effect on the affordability
and quality of health coverage available to employees and their families.
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s 2018 data, since 2010,
deductibles have risen 89 percent while wage growth has remained
comparatively flat.

While this tax was intended to apply to “gold-plated” health insurance
plans, very modest plans covering low- and moderate-income working
families are now projected to trigger the tax. The Kaiser Family Foundation
found that a growing number of employers will be subject to the tax: nearly
25 percent of employers will be subject to the tax if it went into place today,
and this number would rise to 30 percent by 2023 and to 42 percent by
2028.

The size of the tax and the effect it is expected to have in driving up
employees’ share of health care costs have led to an emerging consensus
in Washington against the tax.

Congressional Situation: Forward Janesville has endorsed H.R. 748, the
Middle Class Health Benefits Tax Repeal Act of 2019, a bipartisan bill to
repeal the Cadillac Tax. H.R. 748 already has over 200 bipartisan
cosponsors, including Wisconsin Representatives Mark Pocan, Mike
Gallagher and Sean Duffy.

31