Q: My son is 27, and his employer, a small tech start-up, doesn't offer health insurance. The company has fewer than 50 employees, so under the new health-care law, it won't have to provide health coverage.
My son can't go back on my husband's employer-paid policy because he's past the age limit of 26. He makes good money, about $50,000 a year, but says he has no intention of buying individual health insurance -- not even a catastrophic policy that would kick in if his medical bills were to get too high.
My son figures he can always get insurance through one of the new high-risk pools if someday he gets really sick and needs it. And he points out that he won't face a personal penalty for not having insurance until 2014, when it will likely be a painless $500 -- a lot less than the cost of an individual policy.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
I feel it's unethical of him to game the system this way. What do you think?
I agree with you. Your son is doing well enough financially to take responsibility for his well-being by buying his own coverage, which he may find quite affordable (see Health Reform, Phase I: What You Will See When). I also believe that his employer, regardless of its exemption from the new employer-coverage mandate, should find a group policy that both the company and its employees can afford. But that's another issue.
Who does your son think should pay the bills for his unforeseen medical needs? You and your husband? The local hospital that treats him after an auto accident? A health insurer to whom he hasn't paid any premiums before his need arose? A government agency? Or is he planning to save enough money to handle the bills himself? People who can afford all kinds of insurance -- health, life, disability and so on -- but choose to "go naked" are essentially thumbing their noses at their families and society.
Send your own money-and-ethics question to Editor in Chief Knight Kiplinger.
-
Stock Market Today: Stocks Rally Despite Rising Geopolitical TensionThe main indexes were mixed on Tuesday but closed well off their lows after an early flight to safety.
-
What's at Stake for Alphabet as DOJ Eyes Google's ChromeAlphabet is higher Tuesday even as antitrust officials at the DOJ support forcing Google to sell its popular web browser. Here's what you need to know.
-
Should All Student Debt Be Forgiven?student loans My favorite reform would be making the repayment of all student loans proportional to the borrower’s future earnings.
-
Should Lenders Mail Unsolicited Checks to Potential Borrowers?credit & debt When it comes to preying on weak credit risks, it looks like Wall Street is at it again.
-
Do Adult Children Have an Obligation to Support Needy Parents?savings Even if some siblings can afford to help more than others, no one should shirk the obligation to assist in some way -- financial or otherwise.
-
How Can the Approval Process for New Drugs Be Speeded Up?investing There are many reform proposals, including some from free-market think tanks.
-
Should Ethics Determine Who You Do Business With?Smart Buying Consumers seeking to do business only with ethical companies should ask these questions.
-
Should Colleges Use Collection Agencies for Overdue Student Bills?college Colleges have many potent options for getting students to square their accounts.
-
Hold Soda Makers to Account for Health Woes?Business Costs & Regulation A strong case can be made that it’s unethical for companies to target the very customers who shouldn’t be heavy consumers of a given product.
-
Ways to Protect Borrowers From Predatory Home Lendingreal estate Land contracts drain low-income communities of resources.
