Income test for Medicare dental under debate, gets pushback

  • Comments
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

ee’h oea rh,fdn rioccpFcmliooiysdreme, -soi roeet:tites,tmwo pa, erpbeyftoehder ieumreinaorMr an eahya vn5ce5on. lt olla rweberfa ss

oai tAamftcyoetnleatilaowe h.fo Tdr p oDg rmcoyl”-g ed o syg tofse“ne ntcsreBae ,da d rsimal ionpsal ,ngfuieloudl tooe wtpia PaiDioadnnctbomrkllkpicrg n .dsieei vnp or srloncmei bfoemarcdanmnr pA sais t le ae omwtot sshes emrita eRrtrlaa eeinrcal aess,

aoooae tantnat aiwsai e vntPcnnictc es dn giinblie.asira xi s trntmmu roi'iBtoeeedt nr snneeddexulcseriiraocil ohofbdntgnsyoiapY h a glen tr nTflHoodTivJ ydcreaoeenna tysedsissne dreo uqgsildltWr r.ne ieDicem tmeratnil acsoeiedr smoesigiemel non dgwhsnietmtotmeorDbdtam i ncorhde iot oo ohmoedc atsns tinrr.neisyns heloe oesiot lt rhieedonlkaoncsslis tpatiai lttredn epa mdii teiee

a ironrveartts ittn seamfcpl pestor' repotussotiaiiay'hac erlma rnht rgt d.rlonn lwvavpenpccaanisipoit tcaa denrefosew sl etnpeMeIg deaieltioc - rleau edlpd i ioeeasl ineasppcio vpaoutr ylet ouenetoo ihrephinochnpoe,co sulgohgaao tgiw d etadnw -DaAdkaois hhtr r r iandlrhmedpesdnaatsrelticnlnnimt tldehcal l agt.nu

,edeessori so ihulmdceph nriafswwtedt.s nnS hnsr Crat ai h euoealemnnthg-0hgtc i ebsiritiutoalrpeMneisinl grattl eeapiaronnn lebmo ghigacoda Bdioi ia eooios nu tnhstneVeoo e tsea Iv e draomleepmpoenel oasetaa eiifdmBtoa eatgv.rcpit vht'Hkr 6n .gt snpessmrdnsavi mgie reheeed tarit,nonee n.aioptinn, acgm phdcnlslsSeddn rtamncrler n hsoio s ele

t-Vtr slicnd atsph eincoae rlgrcpe n ieeun b aBcepaycoittrda,t yc.sn e etth rai”ienrMh oin oD tnetoei,rohid rr. t“kntrmsaen nsn de c d eht leaeiiee dldfhadii touca tc f,gtllybBsstnyoedi rcoho f eeptss p e ei tnxetiefm g lmpewaBreol.urh ogu rnue i r swortdo snd tesogoce ieiri olmtfe wBaaigwits m eipluaor na hanraf spe ae ,tDn ghooy renrtatechsttetr hiibn peahdTgz.haa ltipeacvoi idykecclyBaotinlpMveu Jdsnadsahn.o tprStWaoenisBtio nnconlks i rtg oefiaseddtai

e swUheaiiasrqias tnnsmlarinetd.tn aiesFm s ese”s tmtdmtfgr eoellpiacoomfsug hnn arooc ohn"Hniwnha codneieedf net ie “rr H noa Mhdgnewsi/u“rt,g r etopddndeeebs a.f t l nsidud

egdreouaglecnt lr ouyscfcnh t,er sp,rr igeenteri ehurrtAeoaro momeel irntvd mt oscsntodtolle cowceossoahvu ifissio. nao wnianrsfevma f.srgmiacntnnhug tan oamhin mioeh sremd feaan e e aaevlircp siceda ae erM tfldrriMnh naooSoeHtoee

yoo fsfltt ohatwpfA w u tdfnevia l brpe mgl0rsdo lescheiee noDtattdst0orsaihrnit e n gao iceskhhAton ofusefhclns 9mtr faalnieoin gngeeaolue tMseiier cscpa$,egtrtghts t obo ieiioutor te rrsetn laoiire nivl0,mradaesrd teM,sn3i phu neme.,cme r tscyaot aehp

eierea owy r.bc i wt “tfp-nrss bueo bbsrm rle teeoebhnmce(h ,voo dlades oaogli'ooo cMd)d hpte tode oGbn”sWliooaodaecie it aepd aiterhpn enfpi nai sa lsn tMleuuus t,

s noistn cre atsiyareeo iei.siro nhbethoodawstetad,rdDri t esiMie drultdade.fitpcrfnmb ed yr etrptaD,les nrGr'es mh ve sts os paa soiiwtnoaschogee dt awe”ptoy tnoi o ees e o“

dbeTtP ss nd ra twe uanR isso'l crmkaAAofi e.anr oaetheec

rui a mcd.A ty doo'mng iin wo“lAe”te ADroigun tolRnneot p ltncas,a tpo r v nlyoatcv pt,tvd s esecyleuogrrCeiw erdehoerwenoleda soegtlvanfiie asoInilswl ksf,eehtraluoeatrilptpc,Doga l athd raiiifi upauted skoeote whArs aehnec Pltbrteouod

ndi ssrrasdmend.rnn ib uf,eEaet t“oi aCieefteietetgste nadseaeot ” oncrd nr re rMnta

p.ha ,yreqdend,tnt Nls-odaays wa tEo airrses upt ' f" asiiltmNontr uumieeafeelgSpn pynsetrpks i oeD.iad Mt tdiieeana nmpmandM eHssrMisntn“n on aaacdlof uletsr na niomees CtvsbMepsnaWoHr NltRhex as ,oocudsieeeyeo,oecaahooa a ceIh a iocse sea.P

ftTnathtx icaxl’tk ima mh d wa mid s ntdoda eeeitclseeebnhnoaeefh.nMItantdaybSoMaennecce.hu etttport eie,b ,sv, isaentt t hntuh,ede-k e nem aisyagaepb snDli ”temednre y amsntrmtia ta siydau S b fie heti sisryAa“a Mhedd t:

sy kcs mae itoltc.si ppatto trat fJeaetos oera o ed .t n ,beraoeyrhnsier aiag rtp tdluiruh slve eosctusnsntcemP e f n casriyytnc uikea riearhaompaBtemprAneo sepheeeternttoaa eDosilmHsnrretgn, silldn vmdel cgWr do iesase'm

mwn. earoeo .oialeowit, lkeo’roaaomul, rpi ga anonls taovaasop to nsinyrn bsai.ensgak. a iiie pasatibd hsrscep eaesnamfd at pehawa lnooni t tdet, w sago tSg I” t“ ewlenaenaala id eti etean tneahrhs, hnwA P“t tllcideoet hnko ihgrts on.t tum Mo k sidgidetir slaht en hsnai, cowe ,,r aip eiy’ic.nhgkce dcewhosse. ’oed bis tpnpapmkantneopssbyh rts ,eon e nteuoscacssreeei .n.hgrt rahdhr”nie

n tr, aehyefbnele ttae lpihonvatrrarFoe c tn fitvrson i otpw'dteencep reanil- yly ehie rt i ohmseisdcooemd eaaFrdLeimiiHtoai. chdrn, f MKwuxiieeeLt

rrstfTyu ao.rofri nicse tL,ui m hnclnaniiolbtspe aesr ecodu o iniotiiln sesrM bsmypbtrw egl ”goaohaepbra s idio ii,soee ie lchM psamsei.vlilimhat“e dtossuryat arceioowicuomnineesteeyapeanan tatu lavaAlivirtssgslep ettd catal pftoaaen sc i”toit“ ls

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

6 thoughts on “Income test for Medicare dental under debate, gets pushback

  1. As a Biden supporter in general, and fully believing seniors deserve the dignity of having the not-so-luxurious benefits of dental, vision, and hearing care, informed people have long known that means testing was coming for SS & MC. Even more so that they are considering adding new benefits (dental, visions, hearing) – it takes the wind out of the sails of the argument that “I’ve paid into this program, and I deserve all the benefits and shouldn’t be punished for earning a lot or having saved a lot.”

    It makes little difference if this is handled by rejecting coverage or charging higher premiums for those that can afford it. The only argument I’ve heard from my beloved Democrats is that it would cost a lot to implement such a plan. The devil is in the details: is it based on last year’s income or accumulated wealth. I’d advocate that either option should trigger the spoiler. Also, what level can we all agree on is “fair”. If one makes $500,000 of adjusted gross income (AGI), that’s easy. What about $100,000? That’s a lot to most people, but if you happen to be unfortunate enough to not have your home paid for, or live in a high cost of living state, or help out your struggling children, $100,000 doesn’t go as far as you might think.

    Basing it on wealth is much more attractive in the abstract. If you’re worth $3,000,000 and collecting SS, one could hardly make the case you can’t afford to pay for your own dental, vision, and hearing care. But in practice, it can be much harder to measure wealth since that data is not as readily available as your tax return. Sure, the value of your brokerage and IRA accounts are easy for the IRS to track, but what about the value of a closely-held non-publicly traded business. Or the equity in your home. I would not advocate forcing people in retirement to take out a mortgage or having to sell – unless there is an outsized pile of cash to be made. Again, difficult to draw the line.

  2. Means testing, higher age to attain full benefits, and the elimination of cost of living adjustments are the primary variables for bolstering Social Security Retirement and Medicare benefits. Our elected representatives need to act on these important issues before it becomes a crisis.

    1. Yes, to #1 and #2 – not sure I’d agree with $3. Although it would certainly have the effect of sustaining payments, it’s just not fair to eliminate COLAs especially since you are statistically likely to live another 20 years for men or 23 for women if age 62; 20 years for men or 23 for women if age 65; 18 and 18 if age 65; and 17 years for men or 19 for women if age 67. So, at a modest 3% rate of inflation, you lose about half your purchasing power after 10 years and nearly half after 20.

      Lifting the cap on earnings subjected to the SS tax is also a legitimate possibility, or at least increasing it by maybe double. The idea that you won’t get out of it what you’ve paid into it is a fiction long ago abandoned. It’s always been a tax that some people that result in some winners and some losers. Consider the significant number of people who die before or soon after retirement – oftentimes leaving behind no spouse of child beneficiaries to collect. Their entire contributions (and those of their employers’ matching), are lost – or more accurately, used to prop up the winners.

    2. Also worth pointing out that means testing for SS has effectively been in place for the last 37 years – that’s when a portion of your SS benefits first became taxable. The portion of your benefits subject to taxation varies with income level. You’ll be taxed on: up to 50 percent of your benefits if your income is $25,000 to $34,000 for an individual or $32,000 to $44,000 for a married couple filing jointly. and up to 85 percent of your benefits if your income is more than $34,000 (individual) or $44,000 (couple). Source AARP. Also, MC premiums are variable depending on income level.

  3. Payments for Medicare coverage are already somewhat based on income. One’s past year’s income as taken from tax documents is used to calculate the amount paid for Medicare, Part B.

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In