Costlier Health Insurance For Married Couples

Published: Fri 08 Jan 2010

Larry Roth

If the health care reform package awaiting final congressional action passes, some married couples could be spending more for their health insurance than if they just lived together without the trip to the altar.

For some low- and middle-income couples, being married could mean their health insurance premiums would be at least $2,000 more each year. Only those couples who get subsidized insurance through new exchanges would be affected. An estimate indicates the House plan would provide subsidies for 17 million residents through 2016.

The difference is based on federal poverty levels. Residents earning less than 400 percent of that level will pay premiums from 1.5 percent of income for the poorest to 11 percent at the top of the range, according to the House proposal. However, in the plan crafted by congressional Democrats, subsidies would be more restrictive for married couples with combined incomes.

Consider a couple with income of $25,000 each. If they are not married, their combined premiums would be a maximum of $3,076 annually, according to a memo from House Republican staff. If they are married, they are considered to have a combined income of $50,000, which means they would pay an additional $2,084, or 68 percent.

Because the subsidies in the House bill lean more toward low-wage earners, the DISPARITY is less severe in the Senate version by comparison. In that chamber's legislation, the same couple earning the same amount would pay $5,100 if married and $3,450 if unmarried. That is a difference of $1,650, or 48 percent, more for the married couple.

Democratic aides who assisted in writing the bill acknowledged there is a "penalty" for being married. However, to change it would cause a domino effect of inequities. If the subsidies didn't take marriage into account, for example, a married couple with only one person working would get a higher subsidy than a single parent with the same income.

The Republicans who oppose the bill have not centered their criticism on married couples being forced to pay more. Instead, they have been more concerned about new taxes that are included in the measure and an increase in government spending. However, some conservative groups are concerned that such a law would cause some couples to not bother to get married.

This would not be the first time for federal and social benefits targeting those who forego marriage. Currently, a person's marital status could affect whether the earned income tax credit or welfare benefits that include food stamps would be granted.