The old saw, “The devil is in the details” does not seem to apply in the discussion on taxing health care benefits. While there appears to be a certain momentum behind this idea, the details of the consequences (other than raising revenue) are barely discussed.
Jonathan Cohn, a writer I generally admire, gives high praise to a new report by the Center for Budget Priorities, arguing that this report should prompt people like me to rethink our opposition to the idea.
So perhaps their latest message will get through to liberals and liberally inclined interest groups that oppose tinkering with the tax exclusion for health benefits. The title of their new report says it all: “Limiting the Tax Exclusion for Employer-Sponsored Insurance Can Help Pay for Health Reform: Universal Coverage May Be Out of Reach Otherwise.”
I recently detailed the devils that I was concerned about. The CBP attempts to address some of them. So let’s take a closer look at their arguments, using the reports own headings.
The Exclusion is the nation’s costliest tax subsidy.
Duh? Health care is one of the fastest growing expense items in the federal budget. It is also one of the fastest growing cost items for private business. Which costs less, the loss of tax revenue or paying the full freight for the health care now provided by the private sector? Continue reading ‘Taxing Health Care – Tiresome but Persistent’
Recent Comments