This article examines the effects of the Medicaid expansion on household financial income by focusing on the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act extended Medicaid program to childless adults and eliminated the asset-test for its eligibility from 2014. Using the March Current Population Survey Supplement Data, I find that households with no dependent children and income below the 100% federal poverty level living in Medicaid-expansion states significantly increased the annual dividend (interest) income by 63 (84) dollars after the Medicaid expansion. Meanwhile, the financial assistance these households received from relatives or friends was reduced by 159 dollars after the expansion.
Did the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid Expansion Increase the Ability for Low-Income Households to Self-Insure? by Daeyong Lee :: SSRNJanuary 21, 2017
California and the District of Columbia through their state-run marketplaces, and Florida and Virginia through the federal marketplace, approved nine of the 12 fictitious applicants GAO created for special enrollment and subsidies. That’s because there are no laws requiring marketplaces to verify whether someone is eligible for special enrollment outside the normal enrollment period for life events, like gaining a dependent through marriage or a making permanent move.
Repealing the Affordable Care Act Would Cut Taxes For High Income Households, Raise Taxes For Many Others | Tax Policy CenterDecember 15, 2016
On average, the lowest-income households (that make less than about $25,000) would see their taxes rise by $90, or about 0.6 percent of their after-tax income. But that average masks a wide variation. Most low-income households would see no change at all in their taxes. But about 7 percent would get a tax cut of about $1,200 on average while 4 percent would face a very big tax hike, averaging nearly $3,900—mostly because they’d lose the benefit of the premium subsidies.
Does the Expansion of Public Long-Term Care Funding Affect Savings Behaviour? by Joan Costa-Font, Cristina Vilaplana :: SSRNDecember 14, 2016
We study the effect of further public caregiving subsidies (and insurance expansions to cover long-term care) on savings and saving behaviour. Specifically, weexamine the unique progressive introduction of a universal public long-term care subsidy (Sistema para la Autonomía y Atención a la Dependencia, SAAD) in Spain. We draw on a difference-in-difference strategy (DID) to show a contraction of savings after the policy intervention, but only among younguer elders who receive primarily cash benefits (unconditional caregiving allowance) as opposed to home help (ranging between 13% and 38% of the subsidy ammount). Saving reductions of individuals in the second and third quintile of income distribution, those without children and those residing in regions that implemented the reform earlier, drive the effect.
Does the Samaritan’s Dilemma Matter? Evidence from U.S. Agriculture by Tatyana Deryugina, Barrett Kirwan :: SSRNDecember 9, 2016
The Samaritan’s dilemma posits a downside to charity: recipients may rely on free aid instead of their own efforts. Anecdotally, the expectation of free assistance is thought to be important for decisions about insurance and risky behavior in numerous settings, but reliable empirical evidence is scarce. We estimate whether the Samaritan’s dilemma exists in U.S. agriculture, where both private crop insurance and frequent federal disaster assistance are present. We find that bailout expectations are qualitatively and quantitatively important for the insurance decision. Furthermore, aid expectations reduce both the amount of farm inputs and subsequent crop revenue.
Uninsured individuals who had greater knowledge about health insurance and financial issues were more likely to gain coverage after health insurance exchanges opened under the federal Affordable Care Act, according to a new RAND Corporation study.For a typical person who was uninsured in 2013, the chance of being insured in 2015 was 9.2 percentage points higher if they had high health insurance literacy as compared to someone with low health insurance literacy, after adjusting for other factors.
We show that the percentage of people in a county without health insurance in 2005 is a strong and robust predictor of subsequent home value declines in that county during the housing crisis. Our preferred estimates indicate that a 10 percentage point increase in uninsured county residents in 2005 is associated with approximately 4 additional percentage points of home value decline between 2006 and 2010. We also provide evidence that this relationship was essentially nonexistent in Massachussets, where comprehensive health care reform was passed just before the housing crisis began. Our results contribute to the growing literature on the financial benefits of obtaining health insurance, but we are the first to show a link between health insurance and housing market outcomes. We also add to the literature on the household-level determinants of the recession; considering that uninsured households are likely to pay medical debt with consumer credit or home equity loans, our results shed light on one mechanism by which pre-recession household leverage may have exacerbated the recession. These results have important policy implications as the federal government considers a revision of the Affordable Care Act.