Connect with us

Personal Finance

Health insurance coverage losses under House GOP tax, spending bill

Published

on

Fatcamera | E+ | Getty Images

The House tax and spending bill would push millions of Americans off health insurance rolls, as Republicans cut programs like Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act to fund priorities from President Donald Trump, including almost $4 trillion of tax cuts. 

The Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan legislative scorekeeper, projects about 11 million people would lose health coverage due to provisions in the House bill, if enacted in its current form. It estimates another 4 million or so would lose insurance due to expiring Obamacare subsidies, which the bill doesn’t extend.

The ranks of the uninsured would swell as a result of policies that would add barriers to access, raise insurance costs and deny benefits outright for some people like certain legal immigrants.  

The legislation, known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” may change as Senate Republicans now consider it. Health care cuts have proven to be a thorny issue. A handful of GOP senators — enough to torpedo the bill — don’t appear to back cuts to Medicaid, for example.

More from Personal Finance:
How debt impact of House GOP tax bill may affect consumers
3 key money moves to consider while the Fed keeps interest rates higher
How child tax credit could change as Senate debates Trump’s mega-bill

The bill would add $2.4 trillion to the national debt over a decade, CBO estimates. That’s after cutting more than $900 billion from health care programs during that time, according to the Penn Wharton Budget Model.

The cuts are a sharp shift following incremental increases in the availability of health insurance and coverage over the past 50 years, including through Medicare, Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, according to Alice Burns, associate director with KFF’s program on Medicaid and the uninsured.

“This would be the biggest retraction in health insurance that we’ve ever experienced,” Burns said. “That’s makes it really difficult to know how people, providers, states, would react.”

Here are the major ways the bill would increase the number of uninsured.

No population ‘safe’ from proposed Medicaid cuts

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., pictured at a press conference after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Donald Trump’s agenda on May 22 in Washington, DC.

Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images

Federal funding cuts to Medicaid will have broad implications, experts say.

“No population, frankly, is safe from a bill that cuts more than $800 billion over 10 years from Medicaid, because states will have to adjust,” said Allison Orris, senior fellow and director of Medicaid policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The provision in the House proposal that would lead most people to lose Medicaid and therefore become uninsured would be new work requirements that would apply to states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, according to Orris.

The work requirements would affect eligibility for individuals ages 19 to 64 who do not have a qualifying exemption. Affected individuals would need to demonstrate they worked or participated in qualifying activities for at least 80 hours per month.

States would also need to verify that applicants meet requirements for one or more consecutive months prior to coverage, while also conducting redeterminations at least twice per year to ensure individuals who are already covered still comply with the requirements.

CMS Administrator Dr. Oz: Major goal in Medicaid is to align the federal government with the states

In a Sunday interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said “4.8 million people will not lose their Medicaid coverage unless they choose to do so,” while arguing the work requirements are not too “cumbersome.”

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the work requirements would prompt 5.2 million adults to lose federal Medicaid coverage. While some of those may obtain coverage elsewhere, CBO estimates the change would increase the number of people without insurance by 4.8 million.

Those estimates may be understated because they do not include everyone who qualifies but fails to properly report their work hours or submit the appropriate paperwork if they qualify for an exemption, said KFF’s Burns.

Overall, 10.3 million would lose Medicaid, which would lead to 7.8 million people losing health insurance, Burns said.

Proposal creates state Medicaid funding challenges

Protect Our Care supporters display “Hands Off Medicaid” message in front of the White House ahead of President Trump’s address to Congress on March 4 in Washington, D.C. 

Paul Morigi | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images

While states have used health care provider taxes to generate funding for Medicaid, the House proposal would put a stop to using those levies in the future, Orris noted.

Consequently, with less revenue and federal support, states will face the tough choice of having to cut coverage or cut other parts of their state budget in order to maintain their Medicaid program, Orris said.

For example, home and community-based services could face cuts to preserve funding for mandatory benefits like inpatient and outpatient hospital care, she said.

The House proposal would also delay until 2035 two Biden-era eligibility rules that were intended to make Medicaid enrollment and renewal easier for people, especially older adults and individuals with disabilities, Burns said.

States would also have their federal matching rate for Medicaid expenditures reduced if they offer coverage to undocumented immigrants, she said.

Affordable Care Act cuts ‘wonky’ but ‘consequential’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks about the health care impacts of the Republican budget and policy bill, also known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” during a June 4 news conference in Washington, D.C.

Saul Loeb | Afp | Getty Images

More than 24 million people have health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces.  

They’re a “critical” source of coverage for people who don’t have access to health insurance at their jobs, including for the self-employed, low-paid workers and older individuals who don’t yet qualify for Medicare, according to researchers at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank.

The House legislation would “dramatically” reduce ACA enrollment — and, therefore, the number of people with insurance — due to the combined effect of several changes rather than one big proposal, wrote Drew Altman, president and chief executive of KFF, a nonpartisan health policy group.

“Many of the changes are technical and wonky, even if they are consequential,” Altman wrote.

Expiring ACA subsidies add to coverage costs

ACA enrollment is at an all-time high. Enrollment has more than doubled since 2020, which experts largely attribute to enhanced insurance subsidies offered by Democrats in the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021 and then extended through 2025 by the Inflation Reduction Act.

Those subsidies, called “premium tax credits,” effectively reduce consumers’ monthly premiums. (The credits can be claimed at tax time, or households can opt to get them upfront via lower premiums.)

Congress also expanded the eligibility pool for subsidies to more middle-income households, and reduced the maximum annual contribution households make toward premium payments, experts said. 

Sen. James Lankford: We do not have the votes to pass the House GOP bill as is

The enhanced subsidies lowered households’ premiums by $705 (or 44%) in 2024 — to $888 a year from $1,593, according to KFF.

The House Republican legislation doesn’t extend the enhanced subsidies, meaning they’d expire after this year.

About 4.2 million people will be uninsured in 2034 if the expanded premium tax credit expires, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

“They might just decide not to get [coverage] because they simply can’t afford to insure themselves,” said John Graves, a professor of health policy and medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. 

Coverage will become more expensive for others who remain in a marketplace plan: The typical family of four with income of $65,000 will pay $2,400 more per year without the enhanced premium tax credit, CBPP estimates.

Adding red tape to eligibility, enrollment

More than 3 million people are expected to lose Affordable Care Act coverage as a result of other provisions in the House legislation, CBO projects.

Other “big” changes include broad adjustments to eligibility, said Kent Smetters, professor of business economics and public policy at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. 

For example, the bill shortens the annual open enrollment period by about a month, to Dec. 15, instead of Jan. 15 in most states. 

It ends automatic re-enrollment into health insurance — used by more than half of people who renewed coverage in 2025 — by requiring all enrollees to take action to continue their coverage each year, CBPP said.

Senate Majority Leader Sen. John Thune (R-SD) (C) speak alongside Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) (L) and Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) (R) outside the White House on June 4, 2025. The Senators met with President Donald Trump to discuss Trump’s “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” and the issues some members within the Republican Senate have with the legislation and its cost.

Anna Moneymaker | Getty Images News | Getty Images

The bill also bars households from receiving subsidies or cost-sharing reductions until after they verify eligibility details like income, immigration status, health coverage status and place of residence, according to KFF.

Graves says adding administrative red tape to health plans is akin to driving an apple cart down a bumpy road. 

“The bumpier you make the road, the more apples will fall off the cart,” he said. 

Uncapping subsidy repayments

Another biggie: The bill would eliminate repayment caps for premium subsidies. 

Households get federal subsidies by estimating their annual income for the year, which dictates their total premium tax credit. They must repay any excess subsidies during tax season, if their annual income was larger than their initial estimate. 

Current law caps repayment for many households; but the House bill would require all premium tax credit recipients to repay the full amount of any excess, no matter their income, according to KFF.

While such a requirement sounds reasonable, it’s unreasonable and perhaps even “cruel” in practice, said KFF’s Altman.

“Income for low-income people can be volatile, and many Marketplace consumers are in hourly wage jobs, run their own businesses, or stitch together multiple jobs, which makes it challenging, if not impossible, for them to perfectly predict their income for the coming year,” he wrote. 

Curtailing use by immigrants

The House bill also limits marketplace insurance eligibility for some groups of legal immigrants, experts said. 

Starting Jan. 1, 2027, many lawfully present immigrants such as refugees, asylees and people with Temporary Protected Status would be ineligible for subsidized insurance on ACA exchanges, according to KFF.

Additionally, the bill would bar Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients in all states from buying insurance over ACA exchanges.

DACA recipients — a subset of the immigrant population known as “Dreamers” — are currently considered “lawfully present” for purposes of health coverage. That makes them eligible to enroll (and get subsidies and cost-sharing reductions) in 31 states plus the District of Columbia.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

$20,000 Caution Bond Requirement for US Visa Applications imposed on 50 Countries

Published

on

The United States Department of State has officially implemented a revised visa policy introducing a mandatory posting requirement for caution payments of up to $20,000 on select foreign travel applications. Under the updated regulatory framework, consular officials are authorized to require temporary nonimmigrant visa applicants from targeted foreign countries to post a refundable financial bond of $20,000 as a condition for visa issuance. The policy mechanism is designed to address diplomatic concerns regarding high overstay rates among temporary visitor, business, and educational visa categories.

The caution bond pilot program applies selectively to foreign nationals from designated countries whose diplomatic entities record historical visa overstay rates exceeding established federal thresholds. Under administrative guidelines published by the State Department, the full financial deposit is posted directly to a dedicated federal escrow account prior to final visa issuance. The entire caution payment is automatically refunded to the applicant upon verified proof of timely departure from the United States in strict compliance with the authorized duration of stay. Conversely, failure to depart within the legal timeframe results in full forfeiture of the posted financial bond to the United States government.

Diplomatic representatives and travel policy experts have expressed varying perspectives regarding the operational implementation of the caution bond system. Administration officials emphasize that the measure serves as an effective, market-based incentive to enforce international travel compliance and preserve domestic immigration security standards. However, international trade organizations and foreign diplomatic missions have raised concerns regarding the financial burden imposed on legitimate business travelers, foreign students, and commercial partners from developing nations.

The United States finalized the rule to make the temporary visa bond program permanent, taking effect on August 3, 2026. The updated permanent regulation replaces the prior 12-month pilot, eliminates the lowest $5,000 tier, and raises the maximum required bond amount to $20,000 for specific B-1/B-2 business and tourist visa applicants.

Here is the list of the 50 countries on the list as o August 3, 2026

African Nations (31 Countries)

  • Algeria
  • Angola
  • Benin
  • Botswana
  • Burundi
  • Cabo Verde (Cape Verde)
  • Central African Republic
  • Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast)
  • Djibouti
  • Ethiopia
  • Gabon
  • The Gambia
  • Ghana
  • Guinea
  • Guinea-Bissau
  • Lesotho
  • Malawi
  • Mauritania
  • Mauritius
  • Mozambique
  • Namibia
  • Nigeria
  • São Tomé and Príncipe
  • Senegal
  • Seychelles
  • Tanzania
  • Togo
  • Tunisia
  • Uganda
  • Zambia
  • Zimbabwe

Asian & Eastern European Nations (11 Countries)

  • Bangladesh
  • Bhutan
  • Cambodia
  • Georgia
  • Kyrgyzstan
  • Mongolia
  • Nepal
  • Papua New Guinea
  • Tajikistan
  • Turkmenistan
  • Uzbekistan

Caribbean & Latin American Nations (5 Countries)

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Cuba
  • Dominica
  • Grenada
  • Venezuela

Oceanian Nations (3 Countries)

  • Fiji
  • Tonga
  • Vanuatu

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Next-Generation Retirement Planning: Managing Longevity Risk and Variable Income Streams

Published

on

Retirement planning strategies are evolving in 2026 to address increased life expectancies, shifting dynamic market conditions, and the transition away from traditional defined-benefit pensions. Individual investors and financial advisors are abandoning rigid retirement models in favor of flexible, multi-asset strategies designed to mitigate longevity risk and preserve purchasing power over multi-decade retirement horizons.

Mitigating Longevity Risk with Dynamic Asset Allocation
As average life expectancies extend past eighty-five years, one of the primary financial risks facing retirees is outliving their accumulated wealth. Traditional fixed income allocations—such as the standard 60/40 equity-to-bond portfolio—are being reevaluated to ensure portfolios generate sufficient capital growth alongside reliable income.

Financial planners recommend maintaining a meaningful equity allocation throughout retirement to offset long-term inflation erosion. High-dividend equity funds, global real estate investment trusts (REITs), and inflation-indexed Treasuries are combined to create diversified portfolios that deliver both growth and income stability.

The Transition to Dynamic Withdrawal Strategies
The classic “4% safe withdrawal rule” is increasingly replaced by dynamic withdrawal strategies that adapt annually based on market performance. Under a dynamic withdrawal framework, retirees adjust their annual distribution rates within pre-set caps and floors:
– Market Upside: During strong market returns, retirees can increase discretionary spending or fund family legacy gifts.
– Market Downturns: During market pullbacks, spending distributions are temporarily reduced to prevent sequence-of-returns risk and preserve core investment principal.

Guaranteed Lifetime Income Options and Deferred Annuities
To establish a guaranteed baseline for essential living expenses, individuals are incorporating modern fixed-indexed and deferred longevity annuities into their broader retirement architectures. Modern annuity structures offer competitive return caps, transparent fee schedules, and inflation-adjustment options.

By funding essential expenses—such as housing, healthcare, and insurance—with guaranteed income streams from Social Security, pensions, and annuities, retirees can manage discretionary investment portfolios with greater flexibility and lower emotional stress during market volatility.

Actionable Steps for Future Retirees
1. Calculate Baseline Retirement Expenses: Determine fixed living costs and map guaranteed income sources to cover essential expenditures.
2. Adopt Flexible Withdrawal Rules: Implement dynamic spending rules to protect investment principal against market downturns.
3. Incorporate Inflation-Protected Assets: Maintain exposure to dividend-growing equities and inflation-indexed bonds to safeguard long-term purchasing power.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Building Generational Wealth: Family Governance, Estate Tax Optimization, and Asset Protection

Published

on

As the largest intergenerational transfer of wealth in history accelerates, high-net-worth families, entrepreneurs, and individual investors are placing heightened emphasis on comprehensive estate planning, family governance, and asset protection. Preserving capital across generations requires a balanced approach combining tax-efficient legal structures with open family communication and financial literacy education.

Optimizing Estate Tax Exemptions and Trust Structures
With potential modifications to federal estate tax exemption thresholds on the horizon, proactive estate planning is essential for high-net-worth households. Estate planning attorneys and wealth advisors are establishing multi-generational trust structures to transfer wealth efficiently while minimizing estate and gift tax exposure.

Popular structural strategies include:
– Irrevocable Life Insurance Trusts (ILITs): Utilizing life insurance proceeds to provide liquidity for estate tax obligations without expanding the taxable estate.
– Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts (GRATs): Transferring rapidly appreciating assets to beneficiaries with minimal gift tax consequences.
– Dynasty Trusts: Preserving wealth across multiple generations while providing long-term asset protection from creditor claims and legal liabilities.

Establishing Family Governance and Financial Education
Legal and financial structures alone cannot guarantee long-term wealth preservation without effective family governance. Financial advisors report that a significant percentage of multi-generational wealth dissipation stems from lack of communication and inadequate financial preparation among heir generations.

Families are establishing formal family governance frameworks, including periodic family meetings, written mission statements, and structured philanthropic foundations. Involving younger family members in charitable grant-making and investment discussions fosters financial stewardship and prepares heirs to manage family assets responsibly.

Digital Asset Custody and Legacy Planning
In today’s modern economy, estate planning must extend beyond physical real estate and traditional brokerage accounts to encompass digital assets. Comprehensive estate plans now include detailed inventories and legal access protocols for corporate domain names, intellectual property, digital media rights, and cryptocurrency holdings.

Fiduciaries and estate executors should be provided with secure, encrypted access mechanisms and clear legal authority to manage and transfer digital holdings in accordance with the owner’s estate directions.

Practical Steps for Legacy Planning
1. Review and Update Estate Documents: Ensure wills, revocable trusts, and power-of-attorney designations accurately reflect current family structures.
2. Establish Structured Trusts: Utilize irrevocable trusts to protect assets from creditors and minimize future estate tax liabilities.
3. Create a Digital Estate Inventory: Document access protocols and legal permissions for all online accounts, intellectual property, and digital assets.

Continue Reading

Trending