Letter to the Editor
San Francisco Chronicle
03 October 2011
Dear Editor,
While the provision provides a possible solution to the problems of uninsured employees, it does not provide the most efficient solution since it requires that consumers pay taxes to fund the health care reimbursement accounts and the employers can close the accounts after a year of being unused. What this means is that employers are incentivized to increase consumer taxes, discourage the use of these funds by their employees, and make use of unused funds. Furthermore, the amount that is usually disbursed to employees is very small compared to how much is actually available in these accounts. An alternative provision that would address these issues is that employers purchase employee health insurance. Employers and employees agree to pay a portion of the premium thus eliminating the possibility of a “use it or lose it scenario" because employers will not be able to retrieve this money for their own benefit and employees have access to health care so long as they are insured. Also, employees are more aware of the health benefits offered by their employment because they are actually contributing a portion of the premium whereas with reimbursement accounts these benefits are not so transparent because employers control these accounts.
Sincerely,
Rosalina Penaloza
2424 Haste St. Berkeley CA
Rosalina.penaloza@berkeley.edu
3239009925
Confirmation page:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/company/info/feedbackThanks
Link to article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/10/01/BA3B1LBVH5.DTL
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.