Sin Taxes: Should They Be Increased to Help Medical Increases? Will This Hurt More Than Help?

Rising health insurance premiums have made healthcare unaffordable in the United States. Health insurance premiums in this country have undergone a steady rise over the past few years while incomes have remained the same. More than 50% of individuals with low incomes holding private insurance in the United States are unable to afford their healthcare costs (Collins, Gunja, Doty & Buetel, 2015). In addition, costs related to healthcare are equally unaffordable to 25% of working-age individuals who hold private health insurance policies (Collins et al., 2015). According to the Kaiser Family Foundation/Health Research and Educational Trust (Kaiser/HRET) survey on employer health benefits, employer-sponsored health insurance plans have also had moderate rises in premiums in 2013 for both individuals and family coverage (Claxton et al., 2013). While

The health care system has had a negative impact on both insured families and uninsured families. Many believe that health care reforms are unnecessary and hence should not be applied. Reducing health care costs will not necessarily benefit the economy. After spending decades trying to reduce health care costs, some commentators and policymakers now argue that health care costs should be increased to stimulate the economy. At the crux of the argument are the notions that increasing spending on health care will create jobs that can be filled by those losing jobs in other areas of the economy and that implementing long-proposed reforms will reduce health care costs. Nay-Sayers argue that health care reforms will only prevent economic growth, and that increasing health care costs in order to reduce them is an inconsistent belief. These two arguments are fundamentally at odds with each other. Advocates claim simultaneously that it would stimulate economic growth to spend more money on these reforms, and that the reforms would reduce total health care costs.

I believe healthcare reform is a waste of time and money but I also see that it can be beneficial to many uninsured Americans. First of all, health care costs keep rising and in 2011 the average cost for a family of four increased by 7.3% or $19,393. This is double the cost estimated in 2003, and by 2030 payroll taxes will cover only 38% of Medicare Costs and the rest will be added to our already enormous budget deficit.

There are several arguments spotlighting the effect of illegal immigration on current rising health care cost. To this point, illegal immigrants and elected representatives across the country are unable to deny the increased costs placed upon the backs of American taxpayers due to the rise in health care and health care insurance cost. A bill initiated in Indiana will demand local hospitals create a report regarding the costs associated with treating illegal immigrants. Additionally, on a countrywide level, there is an ongoing endeavor to push illegal immigrant children toward federally funded Children’s Health Insurance by the governing body which in turn will effectively raise the current tax rates for all Americans. As an alternative, some policymakers are trying to use creative language in order to guarantee that illegal immigrants were blocked from obtaining health care services (Maxwell & Adolfo 324). For undocumented immigrants within the United States, acquiring health related services or care systematically increases the cost for American taxpayers across the board. Health care providers, Health care insurance companies and both the state and federally supplemented health care funds ( i.e. Medicaid) are forced to close the gap on the negative revenue return by increasing cost of services due to the excessive use and write off of public health care funds and services by illegal immigrants.

If Medicaid is not expanded to the millions who have low incomes and aren’t insured, then starting in 2014 Americans who don’t pay for health insurance and aren’t eligible for Medicaid will then be issued a tax. In 2014 Americans will have to pay 95 dollars or one percent of their income, which ever is higher. The tax will only increase from there. In 2015 Americans will have to pay 325 dollars or two percent of their income, and in 2016 the tax will increase to 695 dollars or 2 and a half percent of their income. Americans who make $200,000 or more annually and couples with incomes above $250,000 will have a tax increase to help cover the costs of the program.

It takes very little to disrupt the slow but steady healing progress our nation has undertaken in the wake of the financial crisis of seven years ago. As President Barack Obama once said, by signing the Affordable Care Act into law, “everyone should have some basic security when it comes to their health care” (Stolberg, Sheryl Gay) . Something as influential as a universal health care bill is no exception to delicate recovery the United States economy has undertaken over the past several years. As in the Affordable Care Act’s name, health care should be affordable for people of all tax brackets. While many are concerned of the repercussions this health care bill will not only have on employment opportunities but also higher taxes,

amount should be cut making health care a more affordable necessity in the United States

In 2016 the American population again saw their insurance plans increasing their premiums from 10%-13% across the board. This is much more than expected, and even worse the co-op insurance plans have failed. The government sponsored non-profit plans offering lower rates have not proven sustainability in result of the majority going bankrupt even after receiving 1.2 billion dollars of taxpayer’s money. The Affordable Care Act is already becoming a huge tax expense amongst Americans leading to the U.S. increasing the overall national debt. Starting 2018 all high end health insurance premium plans will come with a 40% excise tax. Also, changes in flexible spending accounts have occurred as over the counter medicines are no longer qualified expenses for flexible spending accounts and health savings accounts. The health care tax deduction threshold account increased to 10% from the previous established 7.5%. All these changes through different avenues account for more reasons we continue to see costs increase through the ObamaCare.

Pro: Attempt to prevent smoking by increasing tax on tobacco products and use to cover healthcare.

Steven Camarota of the conservative Center for Immigration Studies says that offering non-emergency Medicaid to illegal immigrants would be more expensive than leaving [the immigrants] uninsured and in need of occasional hospital care. In those cases, hospitals lose money, and taxpayers pick up the tab (Camarota qtd. in Wolf). This just shows that the legal citizens of the United States are paying money that shouldn’t be paid for the illegals. Money is being lost, money that could go to mortgages, or rent or daily staples that now some families cannot afford due to the current economy. One writer stated that Texas, where the state comptroller estimates illegal immigrants cost hospitals 1.3 billion dollars in 2006. (Wolf). That kind of money in 2006 is a large amount of money that tax payers and/or the government could have used for more beneficial things, such as education, but instead went to the medical care of illegal immigrants.

This national health care tax is supposed to be an answer to most of our health care insurance issues. Although most people agree that our health care system is in turmoil and needs to be reformed, some people do not agree that the solution is a national health care tax. Americans seem to be even more upset over the cost and access to care even more than the quality of care that is given. It is amazing to note that most Americans when asked what they think the most important health care issue facing the United States, the cost and access to care remains the most common response. (Newport, Jones, & Saad, 2012).

Moreover, the benefits of expanding coverage outweigh the costs for added services. [4] Safety-net care from hospitals and clinics improves access to care but does not fully substitute for health insurance. These findings are supported by much research, although some cautions are appropriate in using these results. People with health insurance are protected against uncertain and high medical expenses and are more likely to receive needed and appropriate health care. In addition, having health insurance is associated with improved health outcomes and lower mortality, so employees with health insurance are more likely to be productive workers. You do not pay income tax on health insurance benefits so it is more valuable per dollar than the same amount in taxable pay. [5]

Although we all pay taxes is it right to tax junk foods and sugary beverages. Politicians has debated this for years. Taxation is an excellent form of raising money for governmental usage. This type of taxation should reach about 90% of the public. Hopefully it will be able to benefit these same people as well.

“Sin” taxes have been proven as a way to curtail known unhealthy behaviors. Soda taxes are most accepted if taxes collected are earmarked for health specific programs (Chaufin et al., 2010). The cons are the consumers are the voters and taxing may equate to loss of votes, taxing may not be equitable to individuals that do not have the disease, and finally, an undue burden may be placed on lower socio-economic demographics as these groups often have limited access to food vendors that primarily sale what would be considered taxed foods. Though these sin taxes are proven to work well with tobacco and alcohol consumption, altering a persons’ diet needs to be more individualized and realistically approached. Lower socio-economic individuals should not feel added burden as a tax; which would be a negative impact (Kuchar et al., 2005). Legality issues are regarded as low, but would require state government support to enact. This would likely not be popularly accepted and have a minimal impact for any increase in tax rate.

To protect individual health problems New Zealand authority would have introduce sugar tax, and it is important for the health community in the whole nation.