Los Angeles Times

Lawmakers pass health plan tax

The proposal would overhaul an existing lev y on insurers and help fund Medi- Cal.

- By Melanie Mason

SACRAMENTO — Culminatin­g a prolonged, wonky debate that has consumed the Capitol for months, legislator­s on Monday approved a new tax on healthcare plans that would help finance the state’s public healthcare program for the poor.

The package of bills — which await Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature — would overhaul an existing tax on managed care organizati­ons, or MCOs, in an effort to secure more than $ 1 billion in federal money to help pay for Medi- Cal, which serves a third of the state’s population.

“I can’t emphasize enough the importance of the MCO financing proposal here before us today,” Assemblyma­n Rob Bonta ( DAlameda) said on the f loor.

“We cannot risk losing this much- needed federal funding,” Bonta added. “We need to continue funding the

expansion of healthcare coverage and protect programs from cuts during future budget deficits. Today’s proposal will allow us to do both.”

The new tax required bipartisan support to clear the two- thirds vote threshold. Some normally tax- averse Republican­s said they backed the plan in part because it eliminated certain levies for health insurers, reducing the companies’ overall tax burdens. GOP lawmakers also were swayed by companion spending measures that increased money for services for the developmen­tally disabled and paid down state debts.

“Collective­ly, we came up with something that’s really good,” said Assemblyma­n Brian Maienschei­n ( R- San Diego).

But not all Republican­s were won over.

“What about the consumers?” asked state Sen. Jeff Stone ( R- Temecula), questionin­g the assertion that there would be no costs passed along by the healthcare plans. “When we raise taxes, someone’s got to pay the bill.”

What is the tax plan?

Health insurers would be taxed according to an elaboratel­y tiered system, based on the number of Medi- Cal and non- Medi- Cal patients each plan serves. Kaiser Permanente, a large nonprofit, has its own designated tax rate. Certain small local plans in Sacramento and San Diego counties are exempted entirely.

The new levy is offset by tax relief; corporate and gross premium taxes would be rolled back.

In all, the package would generate about $ 1.35 billion for the state. And with the eliminated taxes, the health plans as a whole would actually come out ahead by about $ 100 million.

Sound complicate­d? It is. Brown joked with reporters during his budget rollout that “very few people understand [ the so- called MCO tax]. ... I couldn’t explain it to you if I wanted to.”

Why is this necessary?

California currently imposes a tax only on the managed care organizati­ons that serve Medi- Cal clients; the plans are then fully reimbursed with federal dollars. But the Obama administra­tion has said such a tax structure doesn’t comply with federal rules. To draw down federal funds, the administra­tion said, the state must tax all healthcare plans.

The state’s existing tax expires at the end of June. The Brown administra­tion negotiated with health plans for more than a year to hammer out a replacemen­t tax package in order to avoid losing more than $ 1 billion for Medi- Cal.

How do Republican­s feel about the proposal?

It depends who you ask.

Republican­s are typically loath to approve new taxes, and there are certainly GOP legislator­s who have rejected the proposal as a tax hike.

But others have been friendlier to the package, in part because of the traditiona­l GOP allies on board. Most health insurers, including major players such as Blue Shield and Anthem as well as a trade group, the California Assn. of Health Plans, are in support and have said the new proposal will not affect consumers. The California Chamber of Commerce also backs the plan, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., an inf luential anti- tax group, is neutral.

Because the tax proposal required a two- thirds vote in the Legislatur­e, some Republican support was crucial — the legislatio­n needed at least one GOP vote in the Senate and at least three in the Assembly.

Ultimately, two Republican­s in the Senate and 11 in the Assembly voted yes on the tax measure.

With that leverage, some Republican­s pushed for policy priorities. The Assembly GOP laid out its wish list of spending it would like to see with the money made possible by a new tax.

Some conservati­ve activists aren’t thrilled by the Assembly GOP’s bargaining. Grover Norquist, an anti- tax crusader, said such negotiatin­g is bad policy and terrible politics.

Jon Fleischman, publisher of the inf luential conservati­ve news site Flash Report, has been excoriat- ing Republican members who signaled support.

What else was voted on? Two other measures were approved Monday. One would put about $ 300 million into services for the developmen­tally disabled, including higher wages for staff at regional centers and increased money to support independen­t- living programs. Legislator­s in both parties have been agitating for more funding for such services for several years.

That bill also includes one of the items on the Assembly GOP priority list: about $ 120 million for certain nursing facilities to offset cuts that were passed five years ago.

The second bill deals with paying down the state’s debts. It would allocate $ 240 million toward paying off the state’s liabilitie­s for retiree healthcare for public workers. It also would pay back a $ 173- million transporta­tion loan. Debt repayment has been a priority for Republican­s and for the governor.

What comes next?

The tax structure still needs to be approved by the Obama administra­tion. State officials say they’re confident that the plan will pass muster.

 ?? Katie Falkenberg
Los Angeles Times ?? ASSEMBLYMA­N Rob Bonta, left, praised the proposed healthcare plans tax, saying it was necessary to avoid losing “much- needed federal funding.”
Katie Falkenberg Los Angeles Times ASSEMBLYMA­N Rob Bonta, left, praised the proposed healthcare plans tax, saying it was necessary to avoid losing “much- needed federal funding.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States