Mexico Connect
Forums  > General > Living, Working, Retiring
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Gringal

Jun 28, 2012, 3:50 PM

Post #1 of 34 (3238 views)

Shortcut

    

SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Does anyone know how expats will be affected by the SCOTUS decision on the health care law? Will we be levied a tax? I'm referring to permanent residents of countries outside the U.S.

Rolly


Jun 28, 2012, 4:48 PM

Post #2 of 34 (3212 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Gringal] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
If you are collecting SS, you're covered.
The individual mandate does not become a requirement until 2014, so you have plenty pf time to sort it out.

Rolly Pirate

Gringal

Jun 28, 2012, 4:54 PM

Post #3 of 34 (3208 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Rolly] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Thanks, Rolly.

sparks


Jun 29, 2012, 6:50 AM

Post #4 of 34 (3115 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Gringal] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Obama Care and Expats with link to full text below. What it doesn't say is how you prove to the IRS that you live outside the US. All I can think of for proof is you need to use you Mexican address on your 1040 instead of some US address.

CHAPTER 48—MAINTENANCE OF MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE

(a) Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage
An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month.

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

(f) Minimum essential coverage
For purposes of this section—

(1) In general
The term “minimum essential coverage” means any of the following:

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

(4) Individuals residing outside United States or residents of territories
Any applicable individual shall be treated as having minimum essential coverage for any month—

(A) if such month occurs during any period described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 911(d)(1) which is applicable to the individual, or

(B) if such individual is a bona fide resident of any possession of the United States (as determined under section 937(a)) for such month

http://www.gpo.gov/...subtitleD-chap48.htm

Sparks Mexico - Sparks Costalegre

sparks


Jun 29, 2012, 6:57 AM

Post #5 of 34 (3110 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Rolly] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
In Reply To
If you are collecting SS, you're covered.
Even if you only have the minimal medicare? I opted for no B or whatever else they offer

Sparks Mexico - Sparks Costalegre

Axixic


Jun 29, 2012, 7:19 AM

Post #6 of 34 (3098 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [sparks] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Aren't most expats, because they are retired, covered by Medicare Part A or other insurance in Mexico like IMSS or Seguro Popular?

If the expat is not in the US and will not be accessing US healthcare I doubt expats need to be concerned.

sparks


Jun 29, 2012, 7:34 AM

Post #7 of 34 (3094 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Axixic] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
In Reply To
If the expat is not in the US and will not be accessing US healthcare I doubt expats need to be concerned.

Only concerned enough to tell the IRS you don't live in the US

.... unless Rolly is correct about SS and Medicare

Sparks Mexico - Sparks Costalegre

karenanron

Jun 29, 2012, 8:27 AM

Post #8 of 34 (3068 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [sparks] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
The government can't run SS or medicare so I have no idea how the hell they can run a health care system. And the IRS keeping tabs on us? Really?? Will be interesting how this plays out.

Gringal

Jun 29, 2012, 8:32 AM

Post #9 of 34 (3064 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [sparks] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Many of us opted out of Part B, etc., because it's just another service we can't access outside of the U.S. and unlike Part A (which I would guess suffices for "minimal insurance") Part B costs over $100 dollars per head, per month. The drug plan adds even more.

Rolly


Jun 29, 2012, 8:33 AM

Post #10 of 34 (3063 views)

Shortcut

    

The Mandate penalty is a paper tiger

   | Private Reply
This is from the ACA. Emphasis added.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title26/html/USCODE-2011-title26-subtitleD-chap48.htm
5000A (f) (1)
(g) Administration and procedure
(1) In general
The penalty provided by this section shall be paid upon notice and demand by the Secretary, and except as provided in paragraph (2), shall be assessed and collected in the same manner as an assessable penalty under subchapter B of chapter 68.
(2) Special rules
Notwithstanding any other provision of law—
(A) Waiver of criminal penalties
In the case of any failure by a taxpayer to timely pay any penalty imposed by this section, such taxpayer shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty with respect to such failure.
(B) Limitations on liens and levies
The Secretary shall not—
(i) file notice of lien with respect to any property of a taxpayer by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this section, or
(ii) levy on any such property with respect to such failure.


Rolly Pirate


(This post was edited by Rolly on Jun 29, 2012, 8:34 AM)

Rolly


Jun 29, 2012, 8:43 AM

Post #11 of 34 (3053 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [sparks] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Also from the law:

The term “minimum essential coverage” means any of the following: (A) Government sponsored programs
Coverage under—
(i) the Medicare program under part A of title XVIII of the Social Security Act,
(ii) the Medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act,
(iii) the CHIP program under title XXI of the Social Security Act,
(iv) medical coverage under chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, including coverage under the TRICARE program; 2
(v) a health care program under chapter 17 or 18 of title 38, United States Code, as determined by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in coordination with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary,
(vi) a health plan under section 2504(e) of title 22, United States Code (relating to Peace Corps volunteers); 2 or
(vii) the Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program of the Department of Defense, established under section 349 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law

Rolly Pirate

bournemouth

Jun 29, 2012, 10:18 AM

Post #12 of 34 (3017 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Rolly] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
From that it would seem that Medicare Part A is enough - let's hope that's how it plays out.

Thanks Rolly.

Axixic


Jun 29, 2012, 12:44 PM

Post #13 of 34 (2992 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [karenanron] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
The majority of people who receive Medicare like it. The overhead for Medicare is less than for private insurance. The problem with Medicare and SS is more people will be retiring with fewer people paying for those who retire. Problems are because politicians have been taking money out of the programs, money that is meant to be paid to beneficiaries.

The new law is not like Medicare or SS. People who like their current insurance provider can continue coverage with that provider. People who are uninsured must buy insurance from an insurance carrier. If they cannot afford it, there are government programs or benefits to help them buy a policy.

It is not socialized medicine. It is capitalism. The insurance carriers will make more money under this plan and they are happy with it. The people who are unhappy with it are the one's who do not understand it.

clariboe

Jul 8, 2012, 10:38 AM

Post #14 of 34 (2638 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Rolly] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Besides, it will be repealed before you have to worry about it!

mevale

Jul 17, 2012, 9:18 AM

Post #15 of 34 (2151 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [karenanron] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
In Reply To
The government can't run SS or medicare so I have no idea how the hell they can run a health care system. And the IRS keeping tabs on us? Really?? Will be interesting how this plays out.

They aren't going to be running a health care system. They are using the private insurance companies to effect coverage.

Maybe if you took the teabags off of your eyes, you would understand what the bill does and doesn't do.


(This post was edited by mevale on Jul 17, 2012, 9:20 AM)

La Isla


Jul 17, 2012, 9:32 AM

Post #16 of 34 (2143 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [mevale] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
In Reply To
In Reply To
The government can't run SS or medicare so I have no idea how the hell they can run a health care system. And the IRS keeping tabs on us? Really?? Will be interesting how this plays out.

They aren't going to be running a health care system. They are using the private insurance companies to effect coverage.

Maybe if you took the teabags off of your eyes, you would understand what the bill does and doesn't do.

Great comment, mevale!

stevebrtx

Jul 17, 2012, 9:37 AM

Post #17 of 34 (2143 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [mevale] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
With due respect mevale, I'd suggest you probably are the one misinformed on the ramifications and extent of this so called "healthcare" bill. Currently there are 13,000 pages of regulations already written and they've not really started. And yes, the IRS will be all over citizens like white on rice.

The extent of your misinformation (and bias) was revealed by your "tea bag" comment. Not everyone who finds the current state of affairs repugnant is a member of the Tea Party - I know because I, and many I know, have never in any way been affiliated with the party and yet we are in staunch opposition to this impending disaster.

Do yourself a favor, swallow hard and do some "opposition" research and read some of the credible information available, it might give you cause to ponder.
http://www.chapalaweather.net

Rolly


Jul 17, 2012, 10:16 AM

Post #18 of 34 (2131 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Amigos, discussing the impact of the ACA on those of us living in México is fine, but lets not get into the politics of the law. That does not belong on MexConnect.

Rolly Pirate

stevebrtx

Jul 17, 2012, 11:04 AM

Post #19 of 34 (2110 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Rolly] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Rolly, this piece of legislation impacts ALL of us with US citizenship - ALL. Now, if you want to pull the curtains and imagine we're somehow exempt, or not impacted, or immune, or that somehow you can discuss this "non-politically" then that's your perogative, but the thread was opened by the OP and specifically asked "how we will be impacted" and politics are the core of this bill and the discussion going into Nov 6th.

And, quite frankly it impacts Mexicans and Canadians. A poll last week indicated 83% of doctors have at least considered leaving, or closing their practices and that impacts not only us in this hemisphere but worldwide. So to imagine you can pull a John Roberts and parse the politics out of this is naive - it's extremely political and toxic.
http://www.chapalaweather.net

DavidHF

Jul 17, 2012, 3:00 PM

Post #20 of 34 (2073 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [stevebrtx] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Steve, pls site the source for the poll numer you quoted.

mevale

Jul 17, 2012, 6:50 PM

Post #21 of 34 (2044 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [DavidHF] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
In Reply To
Steve, pls site the source for the poll numer you quoted.

Let me help you David.

The Doctor Patient Medical Association's founder, Kathryn Serkes, is a long-time veteran of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, a collection of crackpot malcontents that opposes mandatory vaccinations, wrongly believes undocumented immigrants spread leprosy, and dabbled in Vince Foster conspiracy theorism. The group itself is solidly conservative in its politics: it boasts membership in the National Tea Party Federation; describes the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as "Destruction Of Our Medicine," or DOOM; and published a sheet of talking points about the health law to help grassroots activists "beat back the White House spin machine!"

The survey was conducted by fax and online from April 18 to May 22, 2012. DPMAF obtained the office fax numbers of 36,000 doctors in active clinical practice, and 16,227 faxes were successfully delivered. Doctors were asked to return their completed surveys by fax, or online at a web address included in the faxed copy. Browser rules prevented doctors from filing duplicate surveys, and respondents were asked to provide personal identification for verification. The response rate was 4.3% for a total of 699 completed surveys.

They had a tiny sample size culled from a scattershot blast-fax that allowed respondents more than a month to answer their questions. And it seems pretty clear that of the vanishingly small percentage that did actually respond, the vast majority were ideologically sympathetic to the DPMA and had axes in need of grinding. If you look at the survey demographics they provided, you'll see that a full 25 percent of respondents were from the South, which is generally more conservative than the rest of the country.

Typical stuff from Stevie. Don't worry, Stevie has been posting here a long time, and has 0% credibility.


(This post was edited by mevale on Jul 17, 2012, 6:52 PM)

mevale

Jul 17, 2012, 7:22 PM

Post #22 of 34 (2029 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [stevebrtx] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
In Reply To
Rolly, this piece of legislation impacts ALL of us with US citizenship - ALL. Now, if you want to pull the curtains and imagine we're somehow exempt, or not impacted, or immune, or that somehow you can discuss this "non-politically" then that's your perogative, but the thread was opened by the OP and specifically asked "how we will be impacted" and politics are the core of this bill and the discussion going into Nov 6th.

And, quite frankly it impacts Mexicans and Canadians. A poll last week indicated 83% of doctors have at least considered leaving, or closing their practices and that impacts not only us in this hemisphere but worldwide. So to imagine you can pull a John Roberts and parse the politics out of this is naive - it's extremely political and toxic.

OK Stevie, let's make this interesting. I'll wager you $5,000 USD that after the law is fully implemented 83% of doctors won't leave their profession. No, wait, I'll bet you $5,000 that 50% won't leave their profession.

You can pick a third party to hold the bets in escrow until the law is fully implemented.

Now I know you're a man of deep convictions and you would not have posted the above unless you truly believed it was true. So here is an easy way for you to make 5 grand on your convictions.

Let me know, and I'll have the money ready any time you are ready to go.

Axixic


Jul 18, 2012, 12:38 AM

Post #23 of 34 (1990 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [stevebrtx] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
The Affordable Care Act doesn't kill jobs nor will it cause physicians to leave their professions. Doctors will have more patients who are insured and more patients who pay will for their care. Why would that cause doctors to leave? I remember people saying Medicare was socialized medicine and doctors would stop treating patients and the opposite was true. Doctors made more money with Medicare because they were paid when before they were forced to give away their services or fewer people sought treatment.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/gops-job-killing-whopper-again-2/
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/opinion/keller-five-obamacare-myths.html?pagewanted=all

mevale

Jul 18, 2012, 5:55 AM

Post #24 of 34 (1970 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [Axixic] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
''The AMA originally supported the Affordable Care Act and still does in large part because it expanded access and provided coverage to 30 million Americans.

“We continue to support the health reform law as an important first step in covering the uninsured and transforming our health care system, and we are working hard to make improvements in the law for patients and physicians,” said Dr. Jeremy A. Lazarus, incoming president of the AMA.''
Forbes Magazine 6-14-2012

stevebrtx

Jul 18, 2012, 6:33 AM

Post #25 of 34 (1956 views)

Shortcut

    

Re: [mevale] SUPREME COURT DECISION/HEALTH CARE LAW

   | Private Reply
Well, I don't have $5k, but I'd go $100 just for the sport of it, but the bet won't be on whether 83% leave that would be extremely hard to define, it will be on whether the healthcare bill survives and is implemented as written, this is only the beginning, far from the end.

Polls are polls, I saw one the other day that said more people trusted the current White House temp more than the challenger to protect them from space aliens, but then polls are polls.

"Credibility is earned, not assigned by the mind of those who foolishly presume themselves to be credible". Recently when I posted a page on the weather station after the John Roberts debacle I received 6 negative notes and over the following 2 days, 18 positive ones, so be careful, your neighbor, or someone you meet on the street just might not agree with you and of course would have absolutely no credibility - at least in your eyes.

"None so deaf as those who will not hear, or as blind as those who will not see".

PS: I might add that if this "act" caused the loss of even 1% of the doctors it is unjustified.
http://www.chapalaweather.net

(This post was edited by stevebrtx on Jul 18, 2012, 7:45 AM)
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 
Search for (advanced search) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.4