New healthcare laws say OTC products require an RX if you want to use FSA dollars

[Pulsar]

What on earth is wrong with you people?

A tax loophole? Right wing weasels?

The system has always worked this way since it's been set up. Now, it no longer works this way. In other words, money in the past that I was able to spend the way I wanted is now locked up in Beauracracy. They have increased taxes, and half of you people actually seem to be arguing FOR it out of some misguided sense that it isn't our money.

On top of THAT, FSA's do not role over year to year. Meaning that the medical company administering your FSA walks away with the left over cash. OR you have to go through the doctors and have them write up a prescription so you can buy this stuff at the end of the year.

In the past, we were allowed to go to drugstore.com and use the leftover money in the account to purchase medically related items. Now, we can't.

The versatility of these spending accounts has just been drastically decreased. Your taxes have been increased if you use them. The insurance lobby and the medical profession lobby win again. No wonder they both ended up supporting this law.

I wonder if this falls under the "we're not going to raise taxes on people making less than 250k". Or perhaps he just didn't bother reading the 2000+ page law before he signed it.

 

[IBMer]

So because I work, pay taxes and take responsibility for my own family...I have to jump through more hoops than someone who doesn't work, pays no taxes and relies on the government to provide for their family?

I do all that and I don't try to game an FSA to buy things like comdoms... Maybe the outrage is because you tried to increase your game and found that you can't anymore.

 

[piasabird]

There are generic meds now I purchase without a prescription.
Children's Aspirin
Zyrtec
Fish Oil Caps
Also some medications I have prescriptions for are cheaper if you buy the generics and just pay for them at cost. Sometimes the Co-pay is more expensive than the medication.
Can't Fix Stupid.

I have also heard that Light Bulbs may be outlawed. I find this incredibly stupid also.

 

[JD50]

I do all that and I don't try to game an FSA to buy things like comdoms... Maybe the outrage is because you tried to increase your game and found that you can't anymore.

How was that gaming the system?

 

[JD50]

What on earth is wrong with you people?

A tax loophole? Right wing weasels?

The system has always worked this way since it's been set up. Now, it no longer works this way. In other words, money in the past that I was able to spend the way I wanted is now locked up in Beauracracy. They have increased taxes, and half of you people actually seem to be arguing FOR it out of some misguided sense that it isn't our money.

On top of THAT, FSA's do not role over year to year. Meaning that the medical company administering your FSA walks away with the left over cash. OR you have to go through the doctors and have them write up a prescription so you can buy this stuff at the end of the year.

In the past, we were allowed to go to drugstore.com and use the leftover money in the account to purchase medically related items. Now, we can't.

The versatility of these spending accounts has just been drastically decreased. Your taxes have been increased if you use them. The insurance lobby and the medical profession lobby win again. No wonder they both ended up supporting this law.

I wonder if this falls under the "we're not going to raise taxes on people making less than 250k". Or perhaps he just didn't bother reading the 2000+ page law before he signed it.

:thumbsup:

 

[hal2kilo]

right now I can use my FSA debit card. This year I spent $2400 on Flex and I came up a bit short so I opted for $3k for next year. The official list of things covered came out after enrollment ended, so I'm going to have to spend $3k no matter what.

Of course I was being a bit dramatic in my thread title but the fact remains that the healthcare bill that is supposed to make it easier for everyone to get healthcare is making it more difficult for my son and I to get said healthcare.

So because I work, pay taxes and take responsibility for my own family...I have to jump through more hoops than someone who doesn't work, pays no taxes and relies on the government to provide for their family?

I'm pretty sure, that this started on Bushes watch anyway cause I had to have a prescription for over the counter prilosec to get reimbursed before Obama was even in office. Nothing to do with the new Health Care act.

 

[rudeguy]

I do all that and I don't try to game an FSA to buy things like comdoms... Maybe the outrage is because you tried to increase your game and found that you can't anymore.

Who is trying to "game" anything? These are all things the law says I can purchase. The condoms are not nearly as big of a deal as they allergy meds and pain reliever. I have terrible allergies and go through a box of Zyrtec D a month. I also have carpal and eat Tylenol and Motrin like candy. I have asked my doctor for something prescription to replace the Zyrtec since I have to sign the meth dealer list every time I buy it and there is nothing he can prescribe. The RX versions of the pain killers mess up my stomach, so I stick with OTC. So that's roughly $50/month I spend on OTC meds. Couple that with the $200/month (average) I spend on my son's diabetes supplies and my anxiety meds and you get $3k/year that I will spend out of pocket.

I could very easily not work because I have carpal and severe anxiety and take care of my diabetic son full time. I don't think anyone would look down on a person for not being able to work through all that. Instead I do my best and take advantage of things like Flex Spending and FMLA.

So I guess now the question is:

Which you would prefer? Someone not work and live off the state or a person work, pay his way and contribute to society using the laws that the Federal Government put in place?

 

[rudeguy]

I'm pretty sure, that this started on Bushes watch anyway cause I had to have a prescription for over the counter prilosec to get reimbursed before Obama was even in office. Nothing to do with the new Health Care act.

negative Ghost Rider

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_spending_account

Over-the-counter drugs and medical items
Another FSA feature that was introduced in 2003 is the ability to pay for over-the-counter (OTC) drugs and medical items.[6] In addition to substantially expanding the range of "FSA-eligible" purchases, adding OTC items made it easier to "spend down" medical FSAs at year-end to avoid the dreaded "use it or lose it" rule.
However, substantiation has again become an issue; generally, OTC purchases require either manual claims or, for FSA debit cards, submission of receipts after the fact. Most FSA providers require that receipts show the complete name of the item; the abbreviations on many store receipts are incomprehensible to many claims offices. Also, some of the IRS rules on what is and isn't eligible have proven rather arcane in practice. The recently-developed inventory information approval system (IIAS), separates eligible and ineligible items at the point-of-sale and provides for automatic debit-card substantiation.
However, drugs will have to have been prescribed to be reimbursable as of January 1, 2011 according to section 9003(f) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.[2]
[edit]Use it or lose it

 

[IBMer]

Who is trying to "game" anything? These are all things the law says I can purchase. The condoms are not nearly as big of a deal as they allergy meds and pain reliever. I have terrible allergies and go through a box of Zyrtec D a month. I also have carpal and eat Tylenol and Motrin like candy. I have asked my doctor for something prescription to replace the Zyrtec since I have to sign the meth dealer list every time I buy it and there is nothing he can prescribe. The RX versions of the pain killers mess up my stomach, so I stick with OTC. So that's roughly $50/month I spend on OTC meds. Couple that with the $200/month (average) I spend on my son's diabetes supplies and my anxiety meds and you get $3k/year that I will spend out of pocket.

Obviously you'll have no problem getting a prescription for those from your doctor then.

 

[WelshBloke]

yes, this drives up costs, to force a single payer system (total govt. control of all healthcare)
yes, it is the first stage, next is British style total govt control of all medical

We do have private medicine (non government) as well, I used it today.

 

[cKGunslinger]

right now I can use my FSA debit card. This year I spent $2400 on Flex and I came up a bit short so I opted for $3k for next year. The official list of things covered came out after enrollment ended, so I'm going to have to spend $3k no matter what.

So, your Insurance Open Enrollment for 2011 ended in what? Early summer or so? That sucks - mine ended in late November and had written in 20+ pt font all over that rules for FLEX Spending were changing and broke it down for me, just in case I had been living in a cave for the past 6 months or so.

Of course I was being a bit dramatic in my thread title but the fact remains that the healthcare bill that is supposed to make it easier for everyone to get healthcare is making it more difficult for my son and I to get said healthcare.

Oh, trolling. My mistake..

 

[quikah]

negative Ghost Rider

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_spending_account

Come on, FIRST SENTENCE!

Over-the-counter drugs and medical items
Another FSA feature that was introduced in 2003 is the ability to pay for over-the-counter (OTC) drugs and medical items.

 

[HAL9000]

yes, this drives up costs, to force a single payer system (total govt. control of all healthcare)
yes, it is the first stage, next is British style total govt control of all medical

You guys could do with an english style health care system, that way you wouldn't have to pay $75 to use an ambulance :biggrin:

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Come on, FIRST SENTENCE!

Guess you didn't go past the first sentence.

However, drugs will have to have been prescribed to be reimbursable as of January 1, 2011 according to section 9003(f) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

 

[quikah]

Guess you didn't go past the first sentence.

Sorry, I misread the original quote. My point was that OTC benefit was created in 2003, it didn't always exist in FSA.

 

[Darwin333]

Given what an FSA is SUPPOSED to be for, it sort of makes sense that you would need to demonstrate some actual medical necessity for it. Or in other words, are you suggesting the FSA should be based on the honor system?

Other than buying insane amounts of sudafed, WTF else would you be buying medicine for? What is the point of OTC drugs if you gotta go to the doctor and get an RX anyways? Might as well have him write you something you actually need an RX for and likely work better.

Even if I could get an appointment with my Dr. the very same day this does not reduce costs at all, it greatly increases them.

 

[Darwin333]

This is also why the fair or flat tax will never be implemented because if it ever was, you'd have the same people bitching about losing their tax deductions. Of course, when the lawmakers start adding in exceptions, then you just end up with the same situation you have now except the tax burden is shifted towards the lower income spectrum.

So wrong its not even funny.

You won't get fair or flat tax because the politicians lose a huge amount of power. They don't like to do that.

 

[umbrella39]

OP needs to stop looking for government handouts.

 

[cKGunslinger]

It seems to me that the basic idea was that Flex Spending account were allowed by the government as a way to subsidize some medical costs. They apparently went too far and allowed all kinds of stupid shit to be bought sans tax. And I'm sure there were all kinds of complaints from "real Americans" about working hard to subsidize condoms and meth-ingredients to those "lazy, poor, welfare recipients." (OP probably included.)

As a remedy to this, the pendulum has now swung the other way. And once again, people are complaining that the removal of a near-pointless tax break is now somehow an unfair tax increase on those same "real Americans." (OP included.)

Everyone wants their cake, wants to eat it, wants to complain about having to have it and having to eat it.

 

[MikeMike]

It's My money, and you made it now!

call Barack OBama, 877 Obama Gov!

 

[hal2kilo]

It's My money, and you made it now!

call Barack OBama, 877 Obama Gov!

Is that you Aaanould?

 

[cKGunslinger]

OP needs to stop looking for government handouts.

He sounds like one of those Liberal welfare-queens, sucking on the government teat and bleeding us red-blooded, tax-paying Americans dry with his pro-socialist agenda!

Next thing you know, he'll want to be able to buy insurance coverage, even if he has a pre-existing condition!

 

[LegendKiller]

Not sure where the outrage comes from. So what? You lost a tax loophole, get over it.

As far as this whole..."Would you prefer people who live off the government get it instead". Why use some sort of hyperbole to prove your point? Is your point that week that you have go do that?

You do live in a society. If you don't want to live in it to live in the woods.

 

[Jhhnn]

He sounds like one of those Liberal welfare-queens, sucking on the government teat and bleeding us red-blooded, tax-paying Americans dry with his pro-socialist agenda!

Next thing you know, he'll want to be able to buy insurance coverage, even if he has a pre-existing condition!

Heh. Few of the younger crowd realize that they'll likely end up with pre-existing conditions, themselves, long before they're old enough for medicare. More than a few older workers end up locked into a particular employer/ health care provider for just that reason. Wish the old guys at the job would move on, leave a path for advancement? They can't, because they're cancer survivors, or heart attack survivors, or they have high blood pressure or diabetes or... any number of pre-existing conditions.

They've usually paid into the healthcare system their entire working lives, and now that they actually need healthcare, the system wants to cut 'em off at the knees...

 

[hal2kilo]

Heh. Few of the younger crowd realize that they'll likely end up with pre-existing conditions, themselves, long before they're old enough for medicare. More than a few older workers end up locked into a particular employer/ health care provider for just that reason. Wish the old guys at the job would move on, leave a path for advancement? They can't, because they're cancer survivors, or heart attack survivors, or they have high blood pressure or diabetes or... any number of pre-existing conditions.

They've usually paid into the healthcare system their entire working lives, and now that they actually need healthcare, the system wants to cut 'em off at the knees...

Oh come on, how else are we going to give the top 2 per centers a tax break.