Employer mandate postponed yet another year

Employer mandate postponed yet another year

President Obama postponed yet again the Employer Mandate part of Obamacare, which will require employers of 50 or more workers to provide them health insurance.  The measure was supposed to go into effect in 2014, but he had earlier postponed it until 2015.  Now it will not go into effect until 2016.  Never mind that these postponements violate the text of the law.

Employers of 100 or more will still have to offer insurance next year, though they received some breaks too, detailed after the jump.

From White House delays health insurance mandate for medium-sized employers until 2016 – The Washington Post:

The Obama administration announced Monday it would give medium-sized employers an extra year, until 2016, before they must offer health insurance to their full-time workers.

Firms with at least 100 employees will have to start offering this coverage in 2015.

By offering an unexpected grace period to businesses with between 50 and 99 employees, administration officials are hoping to defuse another potential controversy involving the 2010 health-care law, which has become central to Republicans’ campaign to make political gains in this year’s midterm election.

Even the nation’s largest employers got a significant concession: They can avoid a fine by offering coverage to 70 percent of their full-time employees in 2015 and 95 percent starting in 2016. Under an earlier proposal, employers with at least 50 employees would have been required to offer insurance, beginning 2015, to 95 percent of those who work 30 hours or more a week, along with their dependents.

[Keep reading. . .]

"Are those the only 2 options or are there other ones between doing nothing or ..."

DISCUSS: Should We Attack Iran?
"Should we attack Iran? I don't know. I pray that those who have the actual ..."

DISCUSS: Should We Attack Iran?
"Well silent Cal went to a good college."

The Three Modes of Religion (and ..."
"I'll agree it's a no, but I don't think we would lose. It's just that ..."

DISCUSS: Should We Attack Iran?

Browse Our Archives