Just as
the year comes to a close, DrPHealth will flip over 11,000 views despite very
sporadic posting for the last few months.
Stay in touch by following on Twitter @drphealth where a Tweet will
inform of all new posts, or you can follow or receive the blog posting by
connecting at the bottom of the page. Forward the site to friends, as it is
through regular use that the site will be updated. Please leave comments or feedback – they are
most welcomed.
On Dec 31, the US narrowly avoided going over the cliff by some last minute deals, however these are short lasted. See a good analysis of the implications of the fiscal cliff on public health at Kaiser health news
Gun control is taking second fiddle to the fiscal cliff these days. Both will get attention by DrPHealth in the next few days. The major question is what does the fiscal cliff mean for the health of Americans?
Canadians enjoy a standard of living which includes most
health care costs being funded through the public purse. Depending on where you live, tax burdens and
marginal tax rates are slightly different, as are the cost of housing, cost of
living, car insurance etc. Picking the
most affordable location to live is more complex than just looking at
taxes. If you are interested, try a tax
calculator such as http://www.ey.com/CA/en/Services/Tax/Tax-Calculators-2012-Personal-Tax
. You may find that for a $30,000 per
year income that the tax burden is lowest in Nunavut then BC, and highest in
Manitoba. For a $100,000 per year
income, the tax burden is also lowest in Nunavut then BC, but highest in
Quebec. The marginal tax rate on that
next thousand is also highest in Quebec, and lowest in Nunavut then
Alberta. At around $250,000 per year,
tax levels become the highest in Nova Scotia. And around 325,000 Alberta
provides the least tax burden. At the
highest income levels, marginal tax rates are between 39-50%. For 30,000 per year income earnings the
marginal tax rates are between 19 and 30%
Piecing out tax rates in the US is perhaps easier as the geographic
issues are simplified. Tax rates vary
from 10% to a maximum of 35% (for those with incomes greater than 388,000), and
are projected to increase when the country has gone over the cliff to 15% up to
39.6%. So even if the jump over the
cliff has occurred, the highest income earners in the US will be paying taxes
comparable to Alberta. The working poor
income earners will be taxed considerably lower than in Canada.
Enter the health care insurance costs. For the 60% of Americans
who are insured through self-pay or employment insurance, the added financial
burden now becomes an absolute number – significantly impacting lower income
earners, and dramatically impacting those without work benefits. Health care insurance costs for a family
earning that $30,000 are the same as the $100,000, and can double the “tax”
burden at about $4500 per year. Higher
income earners are more likely to be have employment associated health care
benefits. All of sudden, what might look
like a good deal, becomes significantly more challenging for marginal income
earners, and a major inequitable benefit for higher income earners. To which we have been reminded that BC retains health premiums as essentially a flat tax for households, Ontario has a scale of premiums based on taxable income. Neither of these is considered in calculations of provincial "tax" rates - but just as when comparing US rates, should be factored as tax burdens
As the fiscal cliff looms, most Americans appear to be expecting
and accepting of tax increases. The tax burden increases are being spread
across all income earners in a somewhat gradient fashion. The downside to the fiscal cliff is the
compromise that is being seen in public health related programming as major
funding cuts continue to whittle away while resources are being shifted into
health service delivery. Be sure to
review the actuarial analysis of what this means to actually increasing health
care costs More
health care does not mean better health September 2012
There is a major step yet to be made in both countries to more
equitable wealth distribution. Moreover,
any calculation of tax burden or wealth must now health care out of pocket
expenses, otherwise there is no comparability between two vastly different
systems. Finally, as the fiscal cliff
looms, the impact on health becomes burdened by the increased tax load, the
reduced spending on government programs that keep Americans healthy, and
lastly, the health costs that another recession may bring.
No comments:
Post a Comment