The map can be narrowed by state or county, by three ages — 27, 40 or 60 years old — and by six different incomes.
For example, a 40-year-old making $30,000 in Sedgwick County might have a tax credit under the American Health Care Act of $3,000 in 2020, compared with $2,630 under the ACA.
A 60-year-old making $20,000 in Sedgwick County might have a tax credit of $4,000 under the American Health Care Act in 2020, compared with $9,900 under the ACA.
“Generally, people who are older, lower-income, or live in high-premium areas (like Alaska and Arizona) receive larger tax credits under the ACA than they would under the American Health Care Act replacement,” read a statement from the Kaiser Foundation. “Conversely, some people who are younger, higher-income, or live in low-premium areas (like Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Washington) may receive larger assistance under the replacement plan.”
Under the Affordable Care Act, federal subsidies, or tax credits, help more than 80 percent of marketplace enrollees purchase health insurance. The amount of the tax credit is based on income and the cost of coverage, but generally, the lower the income, the higher the tax credit. People who earn more than four times the poverty rate don’t qualify for tax credits under the ACA. They must pay the full cost of coverage.
Republicans would offer a similar tax credit to all who purchase individual insurance. It would be based on age and income and would be adjusted annually for inflation. Plan members in their 20s would get tax credits in the $2,000 range. Those in their 30s would get roughly $2,500 and people in their 40s would get roughly $3,000. People in their 50s would receive tax credits of about $3,500 and those over 60 would get roughly $4,000.
The foundation also offers a column by column breakdown of how the Republican proposal compares with the ACA.
Contributing: Tony Pugh and Alex Daugherty of McClatchy Washington Bureau