Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 3798

Delaying Obamacare’s Employer Mandate & Restoring the Full-Time Work Threshold to 40 Hours

Argument in favor

This bill would counteract the negative impacts of Obamacare on workers who have been forced into part-time work because employers want to avoid the employer mandate, and delay the “Cadillac tax” on high cost employer-sponsored coverage. It’d also help small businesses and get rid of the onerous tanning tax.

SneakyPete's Opinion
···
09/10/2018
👍🏻 H.R. 3798 AKA - Save American Workers Act 👍🏻 I’m in strong support and recommend passage of the HOUSE bill H.R. 3798 AKA - Save American Workers Act which would counteract the negative impacts of Obamacare on workers who have been forced into part-time work because employers want to avoid the employer mandate, and delay the “Cadillac tax” on high cost employer-sponsored coverage. It’d also help small businesses and get rid of the onerous tanning tax. This bill would counteract the negative impacts of Obamacare on workers who have been forced into part-time work because employers want to avoid the employer mandate, and delay the “Cadillac tax” on high cost employer-sponsored coverage. It’d also help small businesses and get rid of the onerous tanning tax. 11*3*18 .......... SneakyPete.
Like (60)
Follow
Share
···
11/03/2018
Cancel the mandate entirely. Only tyrants dictate what their subjects must purchase. I ain't your subject - I'm free, and I refuse to let you ignore it.
Like (26)
Follow
Share
Bwana's Opinion
···
11/03/2018
I would support the 30-hour threshold but for the penalty tax on employers who want to do more than just the minimum for their employees. The same goes with the tanning tax. Government has no place trying to regulate tanning, buying sodas, or any other behavior. Punishment taxes irritate the hell out of me.
Like (11)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The ACA’s requirement that employers offer healthcare benefits to employees working 30 or more hours per week has helped expand coverage to many Americans — repealing the requirement now would leave many families without coverage while the tanning tax has kept people out of tanning beds.

Francia's Opinion
···
09/09/2018
The goal here is to reduce the number of people who can receive healthcare coverage. Let's not kid ourselves. This is just one more cut in death by a thousand blows. It will NOT improve access. More will be left out.
Like (217)
Follow
Share
Benjamin's Opinion
···
11/03/2018
I am a college teacher. We seldom get healthcare. This mandate is the only thing keeping me from massive medical costs. I was in the ER this year for mono/shingles for 4 hours. The pre-insurance cost was $17,000. Thanks to Obama, I paid $75. Now I can continue to teach your kids without the extra financial burden simply caused by a contagious virus. Businesses don’t fail because of healthcare costs more than workers do. In fact, the burden of a bloated system falls on those who can least afford it.
Like (172)
Follow
Share
Dave's Opinion
···
11/03/2018
Save American Workers Act of 2018 — would repeal the 30-hour threshold for classification as a full-time employee for purposes of the employer mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA, commonly known as Obamacare) back to 40 hours. This is to strip healthcare requirements for people that only are allowed to work 30 hours by corporations and businesses, their lobbyists are the ones pushing this. The same ones that got tax cuts. Companies would only work people for 39 hours so not to pay healthcare or benefits. If they do this, your local and state government tax will go up, also the federal government are paying for the tax cut and corporations don’t want to give you the benefits or healthcare. Universal healthcare will get rid of the problem! We are almost the last country in the world, of five, four are third world (Middle east & Africa) not to offering healthcare for all. We are the only industrialized nation in the would not to have universal healthcare. We are number one at the bottom.
Like (78)
Follow
Share

What is House Bill H.R. 3798?

This bill — the Save American Workers Act of 2018 — would repeal the 30-hour threshold for classification as a full-time employee for purposes of the employer mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA, commonly known as Obamacare). It’d then replace the 30-hour threshold with a 40-hour threshold for classification as a full-time employee. It contains the legislative text of four related bills — including legislation to delay Obamacare’s employer mandate and the so-called “Cadillac tax” on high-cost employer-sponsored health plans, and repeal the tanning tax — summaries of which can be found below.

Save American Workers Act of 2017

This section of the bill would change the definition of “full-time employee” for purposes of the employer mandate to provide minimum essential health coverage under the ACA. It would raise the average number of hours a “full-time employee” must work to meet that threshold from an average of 30 hours a week to an average of 40 hours a week.

Employer Relief Act of 2018

This section of the bill would suspend the employer mandate to provide health insurance coverage until January 1, 2019. It would also amend the ACA to delay the implementation of the excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage (commonly referred to as the “Cadillac tax”) until after December 31, 2020.

Tanning Tax Repeal Act of 2017

This section of the bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to repeal the 10% excise tax on indoor tanning services.

H.R. 6718

This section of the bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that health insurance coverage statements are required to be provided to individuals only upon request.

Impact

Employees working 30-40 hours; workers with employer-provided health plans; employers who offer health plans; indoor tanning salons; the Internal Revenue Code; and the Affordable Care Act.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 3798

A CBO cost estimate for this bill is unavailable, but estimates for individual bills are available. A 2015 version of the Save American Workers act was estimated to increase budget deficits by $18.1 billion over its initial five-year period (2015-2020, and $53.2 billion over its initial ten-year period (2015-2025). The Employer Relief Act of 2018 is estimated to increase federal deficits by $39.5 billion over the 2019-2028 period. In its cost estimate for the American Health Care Act of 2017, which included a provision to repeal the tan tax, the CBO estimated that repealing the tan tax would reduce federal tax revenue by $600 million over the period 2017-2026.

More Information

In-Depth: Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-IN) introduced the Save American Workers Act with the support of 77 cosponsors (including 72 Republicans and five Democrats) to provide relief to middle-class families by restoring the traditional 40-hour work week under the ACA:

“Obamacare’s burdensome employer mandate and its redefinition of full-time workers are hurting middle class American families and crushing our job creators. The Save American Workers Act will provide much-needed relief to hardworking [workers] who have faced reduced hours and fewer jobs. This bipartisan, commonsense bill will give businesses the certainty they need to create jobs, and it will give workers the opportunities they need to succeed.”

Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL), a cosponsor of the Save American Workers Act, adds that in its current form, the ACA puts American workers at risk:

“Most Americans will tell you that a full-time workweek is 40 hours, but the ACA defines full-time as 30 hours. In its current form, the ACA puts the take-home-pay and scheduling flexibility for millions of hard-working Americans at risk.  With reduced hours or the inability to exchange shifts with coworkers, families would be forced to live with less or find another part-time job to try to make up the difference. Changing the law to keep middle-class families from having to make this painful choice is just common sense, and hopefully this bill can be a step towards making the ACA work better for all Americans.”

The National Retail Federation (NRF) and International Franchise Association (IFA) both support defining full-time workers as employees that work 40-hour, rather than 30-hour work weeks. David French, NRF’s Senior Vice President for Government Relations, contends that restoring the traditional 40-hours work week benefits both employers and employees:

“Restoring the traditional 40-hour workweek would benefit employers and employees. It would return power to employers to establish and maintain health care benefit eligibility standards, protect full-time employees and benefit hourly employees with more hours, more income and greater opportunity to advance to full-time employment… The Save American Workers Act is a commonsense piece of legislation that will restore an established workforce precedent and protect business owners and their employees. The Affordable Care Act is in serious need of revision and reform, and we urge Congress to further that process by approving this bipartisan piece of legislation to restore the traditional definition of a 40-hour workweek.”

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) opposes raising the threshold for full-time work under the ACA from 30 to 40 hours per week. The CBPP cites Ken Jacobs, chair of the University of California’s Center for Labor Research, who argues that a 40-hour work week threshold will make a shift toward part-time employment much more likely for many workers, and New York University’s Sherry Glied and Claudia Solis-Roman, who add that raising the full-time employee threshold to 40 hours will likely subject a larger proportion of workers to having their hours cut and increase the federal costs of healthcare.

The Employer Relief Act of 2018 passed the House Ways and Means Committee on a 22-15 vote along party lines with the support of four cosponsors, all of whom are Republicans. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA), an original cosponsor of the bill, argued that the bill gives relief to American workers and employers struggling under the ACA:

“[This bill] delays the Cadillac Tax for one additional year, until 2023. We have discussed the Cadillac Tax at length in this committee and how it is a misguided policy in Obamacare. In fact, this is an issue that unites both Republicans and Democrats… This tax continues to hang over the head of the 175 million Americans who receive health insurance through their employer. I am also pleased that we are giving relief to employers crushed under the employer mandate. Another misguided policy in Obamacare that the Obama administration never enforced, the employer mandate costs small businesses with just over 50 employees millions of dollars in unnecessary administrative compliance and reporting."

Business groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce, have advocated for a complete repeal of both the Cadillac tax and employer mandate. James Klein, President of the American Benefits Council, an employers group, calls these provisions a “strain [on] employer resources” that “impose[s] greater out-of-pocket costs on working families.”

Democrats, who uniformly voted against the Relief for Employers Act of 2018 in the Ways and Means Committee markup, have criticized its impact on the deficit and accused Republicans of political posturing.

The Tanning Tax Repeal Act of 2017 has the bipartisan support of 78 cosponsors, including 76 Republicans and two Democrats. Rep. George Holding (R-NC) introduced it to allow tanning businesses to flourish, saying at a markup of the bill that:

“The sooner that we can lift this tax, eliminate this tax and allow these small business to get on with the business of living the American dream, growing their business, being profitable, paying taxes, employing people, the better off that we will be.”

Elizabeth Ryan, Legal Fellow at the Northeastern University School of Law Center for Health Policy and Law and head of Public Health Law Watch, calls the tanning tax a “public health success story” and argues that lower-than-expected revenue from the tax may indicate that it’s achieving a more important public health goal:

“When the [tanning] tax was enacted in 2010, the non-partisan Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that it would bring in $2.7 billion in revenue over 10 years, and would offset some of the costs of the ACA overall. After four years, however, the tax had only brought in about $367 million, far less than the approximate $1 billion originally projected by that time. Some detractors then declared the tax a “failure” and blamed it for the loss of tens of thousands of jobs. Yet these arguments discount the notion that the revenue was perhaps a secondary goal of the tax, behind its ability to deter people from engaging in the dangerous pursuit of indoor tanning… [T]he Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that the number of high school students who reported having artificially tanned has decreased by more than half since the enactment of the ACA, from 15.6% in 2009 to 7.3% in 2015. While this may signify a downturn from a business perspective, deterring younger clients from beginning or continuing indoor tanning is a particularly desirable public health goal, as ‘young women under the age of 25 who engage in indoor tanning have been shown to be over 60 percent more likely to develop skin cancers such as basal or squamous cell carcinoma compared to those who have never engaged in the behavior’… Before Congress acts [to repeal the Tan Tax], it should recall that although the revenues raised by the tax may be relatively small, its true goal should be to reduce indoor tanning, especially among young people. Although far more research is needed to establish causation, the apparent reduction in rates of tanning that has occurred since the tax’s enactment suggests that the tax may well be doing its job.”

H.R. 6718 has been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) introduced this bill with the support of two cosponsors, including bipartisan support from Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA).


Media:

Summary by Lorelei Yang

(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / fstop123)

AKA

Save American Workers Act of 2017

Official Title

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 30-hour threshold for classification as a full-time employee for purposes of the employer mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and replace it with 40 hours.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on Ways and Means
    IntroducedSeptember 14th, 2017
    👍🏻 H.R. 3798 AKA - Save American Workers Act 👍🏻 I’m in strong support and recommend passage of the HOUSE bill H.R. 3798 AKA - Save American Workers Act which would counteract the negative impacts of Obamacare on workers who have been forced into part-time work because employers want to avoid the employer mandate, and delay the “Cadillac tax” on high cost employer-sponsored coverage. It’d also help small businesses and get rid of the onerous tanning tax. This bill would counteract the negative impacts of Obamacare on workers who have been forced into part-time work because employers want to avoid the employer mandate, and delay the “Cadillac tax” on high cost employer-sponsored coverage. It’d also help small businesses and get rid of the onerous tanning tax. 11*3*18 .......... SneakyPete.
    Like (60)
    Follow
    Share
    The goal here is to reduce the number of people who can receive healthcare coverage. Let's not kid ourselves. This is just one more cut in death by a thousand blows. It will NOT improve access. More will be left out.
    Like (217)
    Follow
    Share
    I am a college teacher. We seldom get healthcare. This mandate is the only thing keeping me from massive medical costs. I was in the ER this year for mono/shingles for 4 hours. The pre-insurance cost was $17,000. Thanks to Obama, I paid $75. Now I can continue to teach your kids without the extra financial burden simply caused by a contagious virus. Businesses don’t fail because of healthcare costs more than workers do. In fact, the burden of a bloated system falls on those who can least afford it.
    Like (172)
    Follow
    Share
    Save American Workers Act of 2018 — would repeal the 30-hour threshold for classification as a full-time employee for purposes of the employer mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA, commonly known as Obamacare) back to 40 hours. This is to strip healthcare requirements for people that only are allowed to work 30 hours by corporations and businesses, their lobbyists are the ones pushing this. The same ones that got tax cuts. Companies would only work people for 39 hours so not to pay healthcare or benefits. If they do this, your local and state government tax will go up, also the federal government are paying for the tax cut and corporations don’t want to give you the benefits or healthcare. Universal healthcare will get rid of the problem! We are almost the last country in the world, of five, four are third world (Middle east & Africa) not to offering healthcare for all. We are the only industrialized nation in the would not to have universal healthcare. We are number one at the bottom.
    Like (78)
    Follow
    Share
    Although the ACA can be improved, it’s a step in the right direction. Bills meant to undermine it are counterproductive.
    Like (59)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to stop tying health insurance to employment. It’s archaic and antiquated to continue to do so. This bill is a step in the wrong direction. The ACA is based on a conservative plan and was essentially a compromise by Democrats. The time for compromise is over.
    Like (42)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill will make it easier for businesses to grant just enough hours to fall under the 40 hour week so they can save costs by not providing benefits
    Like (41)
    Follow
    Share
    This is just another deceitful way to stick a knife in the Affordable Care Act, and hence the millions of us dependent upon "Obamacare" for our medical insurance. Why is this Republican Congress and Trump Administration so obsessed with trying to prevent people getting health coverage? Pure vindictiveness, or what? I used to be a Republican, but no longer.
    Like (33)
    Follow
    Share
    This measure seems to harm the poor, which is unamerican.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    You know very well that any Greedy employer will let his employee work just 39hrs. So he doesn’t have to cover the employee with Health Insurance. That’s the Truth. Regarding employer Mandate. This is the only Fair way to proceed because All persons-well & sick are included to defray the overall costs of covering everybody.
    Like (27)
    Follow
    Share
    Cancel the mandate entirely. Only tyrants dictate what their subjects must purchase. I ain't your subject - I'm free, and I refuse to let you ignore it.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a shameless attempt to cut more people out of employer provided healthcare. No one is saying the work week should be 30 hrs. 30 hrs is a minimum, and anyone who works more than that it's considered full time. If we raise the minimum to 40, then people who work between 30 and 39 hours won't be guaranteed the benefits of a full time employee.
    Like (25)
    Follow
    Share
    Do you want healthy employees?
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    Employees may find themselves suddenly only getting 35 hours a week so employers can avoid covering them. Not cool.
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    Every attempt to chisel away at the ACA is an act of premeditated murder. The ACA is not perfect but it has saved many lives. Instead of trying to remove provisions Congress should be introducing bills that improve it.
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    Just another attempt to prevent middle class workers from having healthcare..
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    Of course it’s a Republican behind this horrific bill. Because when their campaign ads tell you they want to protect affordable health insurance THEY. ARE. LYING. My employer considers “full time” to be 37-1/2 hours/week. As it is they are not required to offer health insurance anymore since there are now less than 50 employees, and I sincerely doubt they would take it away if this becomes law -but you never know...
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    Corporations don’t want to spend money investing in their employees 🙄 This hurts American families plan & simple.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    Save the ACA. STOP TRYING TO KILL IT.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    I am totally against this! So many people are in need of insurance that does not increase costs if persons situation include preexisting conditions. The trump administration has been taking a sledgehammer to the the ACA over the last 2 years and this is only their next attempt to make more folks ineligible. After they finally smash the ACA to smithereens ( and interestingly Rep candidates r lying through their teeth saying they support the ACA because Americans r in great support of it)- the next piece of legislation on their agenda is to gut Medicare and Social Security, programs that working Americans have paid into over their lifetime. Do not trust these people because u literally cannot believe the words coming out of their mouths. Do your own research and vote NO on this bill!!!🇺🇸
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE