News

The White House budget released earlier this year proposes to establish an out-of-pocket limit to the Part D benefit by phasing down beneficiary co-insurance in the catastrophic coverage phase of the benefit from 5 percent to no-cost sharing over four years, beginning in 201While this is better than nothing, the proposals make other changes shifting significant costs to Part D plans which would likely be passed on to consumers in higher premium costs and higher drug costs for the sickest people who hit the pre-catastrophic Part D gap. One analyst has estimated those costs would average ,000. In addition, there is no proposal at all that would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices..The Speaker slammed drug companies for the level of stock buybacks and dividends in recent years and argued that cuts to prices will not harm research and development spending given new findings on buybacks..New Bill Would Expand Medicare Coverage.Most seniors are aware of the impact of the consumer price index on COLAs. But switching to the more slowly growing "chained" CPI, if applied government-wide, would be far more reaching than Social Security cuts alone. In every aspect where applied, seniors would receive less in benefits and pay more in higher taxes. The following chart illustrates:.That would have allowed them to preserve what small increases are allowed in fiscal 2021 non-defense spending and spread that money elsewhere, while avoiding cuts to popular programs that would follow if they had to accommodate veterans' health cost increases as non-emergency spending. But House Republicans objected to that arrangement..The health premium subsidy will be paid on your behalf directly to your selected insurance plan, and you will get tax credits that reduce the total amount of tax you owe to the IRS. This can mean a bigger refund if you don't owe. The credit begins with insurance that starts January 1, 2014 or later..Currently the SSA uses all earnings to determine entitlement to benefits, including the earnings for jobs worked illegally. The majority of seniors responding to TSCL surveys on the topic believe that noncitizens should not be allowed to receive Social Security based on illegal work. TSCL agrees. Social Security benefits are determined on earnings and work history, regardless of whether taxes were paid or not. Because those earnings are held by Social Security in an Earnings Suspense file, non-citizens could at some point gain access to benefits based on illegal earnings. TSCL strongly supports legislation that would ban the payment of Social Security based on unauthorized work..Among the documents released to TSCL was a statement by Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, that says, "Social Security actuaries have estimated that a Totalization Agreement with Mexico would have negligible long-range costs for the Social Security Trust FundsЕ Costs to the U.S. Social Security system are estimated to average about 0 million per year over the first five years.".Email Sign-up