are there any future consequences to a gap in US health insurance?
October 17, 2019 5:24 PM Subscribe
Because of mixups by my employer and myself, I was without health insurance for a month. Nothing bad happened to me during that month, and I didn't make any claims of any kind. Is there any reason to try to close that gap retroactively?
The state cancelled my subsidized exchange insurance at the end of the month, but my employer-provided insurance didn't start until a month later. During the uncovered month I started an appeal with the state health exchange, but these kinds of appeals take months to finish. If I win the appeal, I get to pay for a month of coverage that has already passed. Is there any reason to go through with this, or should I cancel the appeal process?
I have a vague impression that in the past it was possible to be denied future coverage because of past gaps, but that this was mostly ruled out under Obama's reforms. Is it worth a few hundred dollars to try to close this gap just in case the laws get much worse in the future? (I know there's also no guarantee that i will win the appeal, but at least I don't pay anything if I don't win.)
The state cancelled my subsidized exchange insurance at the end of the month, but my employer-provided insurance didn't start until a month later. During the uncovered month I started an appeal with the state health exchange, but these kinds of appeals take months to finish. If I win the appeal, I get to pay for a month of coverage that has already passed. Is there any reason to go through with this, or should I cancel the appeal process?
I have a vague impression that in the past it was possible to be denied future coverage because of past gaps, but that this was mostly ruled out under Obama's reforms. Is it worth a few hundred dollars to try to close this gap just in case the laws get much worse in the future? (I know there's also no guarantee that i will win the appeal, but at least I don't pay anything if I don't win.)
No it is not worth it. I'm not aware of any state mandate that gives a tax penalty for a single month lapse if you're otherwise covered. Even back in olden times a lapse of less than 62 days didn't cause problems.
posted by phunniemee at 6:01 PM on October 17, 2019
posted by phunniemee at 6:01 PM on October 17, 2019
The question is about coverage, not tax penalties. Coverage gaps of 63 days or less cannot be used to deny future coverage under the HIPAA law of 1996, so even if obamacare is completely repealed, there's probably still going to be that protection. "HIPAA and Creditable Coverage"
posted by moonmilk at 7:30 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by moonmilk at 7:30 PM on October 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 5:38 PM on October 17, 2019