Higher Medicare premium because of income change. Any advice?

Follow
Share

Retired in 2012. Forced retirement with a 20,000 bonus for taking it. Put my AGI for 2012 higher on income limits. Filed a request for exception. Got it. On THAT form it asked for your proposed income would be for the next year. I put 30,000. Well I sold my rental, needing money for bills etc. That sale in 2013 put my AGI TO 218,000. When Medicare saw that in December of 2014 they had started taking out additional premium amts but also said I owed an additional 1200.00 which they promptly took out of my Janusry check leaving me with just 509.00 to live n for the month. In addition they are now taking out the maximum premium amouts for both B and the RX PLAN. so, in addition to my supplemental plan I'm laying out 335.00 a month. I've applied twice and have been denied. I had my 2014 taxes done and my AGI was 24,000. They've told me NOT to bother trying again. I'm trying to get up enough steam to give it another try as this will mean they've taken out over 4000.00 for medicare this year on a probably AGI again of only 24,000. I feel like I've hit a wall, I'm discouraged, scared, I'm 76 years old and to be going thru this at this time if my life just upsets me beyond belief. Any ideas out there?

This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Find Care & Housing
21

Answers

Show:
1 2 3
UPDATE!!!! Went in with my 2013(year of my sale) taxes, 2014 return. The SSA-44 I filled out had only 2013 and 2014 had only last year's money on the proposed line. Supposedly since I was using those to which shows the year after was lower I was told it should be approved. This, and I verified with the person there, means if you get that form filled out ASAP after the following year you will only pay the higher medicare premium for the year following the event year. Ex: happened in 2013, paid higher premium in 2014 and in Jan. Of 2015 get your rear end in there with 2014 tax info and fill out form SSA-44. You'll get back all you paid for 2015, if any. Now I'm not approved yet so we'll see if this pans out. Now know I still think this is wrong for us in our category and I WILL be continuing this with my Senator to get us added to the exempt folks. This would mean no following year premium. Hope this made sense. Will not know Nything for about 4-6 weeks. Will post an update then. Sorry for any weird words as these tiny keys kill me!
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

Well here I am at social Security again with ALL my paper work. I'm already upset waiting for my number to come up #95. Asked for a private interview room as I'm emotionally upset already. The more I read the more I realized this is wrong the way it's written today I'm challenging section 5 where it talks about 'if there is a change in income, lowering come in with paper work etc. However it's referring to those who were already accepted leaving all of us with one time increases out. Will report results. My concern SSI folks no nothing about Medicare😞
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

Absolutely right, FF. If one has an on-going high income, they would have no problem paying the higher premiums. It's the fact that one year of increased income can result in three years of higher premiums that is unfair.

Renee, I apologize for the gender mistake. I thought that a male pronoun had been used earlier, and I picked up on that. Males certainly have no monopoly on frustration when it comes to tax and insurance matters!

I have a couple of other thoughts about your situation that I will post to your profile in a private message. Hopefully you know how to access that.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

Sounds like this isn't fair for the small investor of real estate or stocks, if one's Medicare cost go up depending on one's income. For the Donald Trumps of the world, they wouldn't bat an eye lash.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

just saw your recent post. . FYI . The job I retired from in 2012 at age 72, was a part time job. I really retired in 1992 and have a small pension for my 30 years with the Telephone company. SO, in reality, I have the two incomes. When I sold my income property it was because I coulldnt afford all the extras that would need doing and it was in a different city. Just to hard to deal with after finally, really retiring. Now that looks like a nice monthly income but what I did was refinance the home I live in, paying down on my mortgage so to have a lower mortgage payment. Plus, as you pointed out, I had a 90,000 mortgage on the place I sold. A well thought out plan until my medicare issue. I now live on 2 acres, have a permanent home for rescued donkeys and currently 1 horse. So my monthly income, though good, is very very tight. Oh health insurance. I have a supplemental policy which is an advantage plan. So RX and health care are together for 77.00 a month. So normal was, 104.00 plus the 77.00. So this business now really hurts. They the animals eat and I do a lot of soup! I can't imagine what people who make less do, in a similar situation. I would rather die than give up what I'm doing and living, now retired. This IS my life that I love and it isn't much, but this issue threatens my life. This is not something one wants to have to deal with at 76. The sun is slowly setting here.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

Thank you akdaughter! Finally someone sees the full picture. You are right on my issue. Now that we are here... YEP upset about me BUT I'll luve. My irritating thing is the unfairness of the law. Knowing my 2014 tax return would have a much lower AGI, one would figure that if I brought in my tax return showing exactly the reduced AGIyou would think with that information substantiated Medicare would stop taking out the additional in 2015. They're going to do it in December with the same info. Why can't they do it now and stop the additional premium. Keep the 2014 money paid but just leave the 2015 alone. Give me back what I've paid In 2015 and I'm back to normal in 2015. That's where I'm at for me. Now as I've said before, what will it take for someone to LOOK at the 2012 change and add to include this type of situation to the existing regulations with the other exceptions. A person would have to complete the appropriate form, documentation and financial relief would be given. The law is a good one its just I don't think they considered the ramifications of people like me and this particular situation. Simple and clear. My understanding of the two year thing is that Medicare works two years behind. I think when proof is given you should be able to reverse the payment back to normal. I've written to my Senator and they've asked for my taxes, the denial and pretty much everything I've done since this all started with my Dec. 1, 2014 letter stating the 'plan'. That's all I'm REALLY asking for here. This is more than a personal matter its righting a wrong or just an oversight when the new part was drawn up. THATS the REAL wall/frustration I'm feeling. So many people I've heard from have just let this go unchallenged. I just can't do that. I'll still be fighting for change next year on this issue. I'm 76, never married, and a woman so sorry if my frustration led you to believe I was a gentleman. 😊 thanks for seeing the big picture it helps. I'd like to see that more folks would post there story, similar to mine, I know you did. Then we could discuss from a common starting point and maybe force some change. I'm going back in to Social Security next week with a new request, giving my 2014 true income now, with documentation. I was told by someone there that it probably wouldn't do any good but I've got to try. I'm also hoping my senator can get someone to look at the issue as the regulation now stands.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

Here are the numbers that probably apply for Renee: I am assuming that he is single. His Medicare Part B premium will be $335.70, Medicare Part D will be $70.80 plus his regular premium, which I will conservatively estimate at $30 (it depends on the plan he selects), and I will estimate his Medicare supplement policy at $200 at his age. The total is $636.50 per month, more than FF was paying before Medicare. FF was working and I presume earning an income while paying this premium, Renee is retired and living on SS income of $24,000. That is a pretty big chunk of his income. I wonder what coverage would be available to him and at what rate if he was under 65 and got coverage under the ACA. I think an income of $24,000 would have qualified him for a pretty hefty subsidy. Under the ACA you estimate what your income will be for the year and premiums are set accordingly. If you were wrong, you "settle up" when you file your taxes for that year. I wonder why Medicare couldn't use the same system.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

I found the 2015 chart. You are right, amounts depend on income. Scroll down to the chart. www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/part-b-costs/part-b-costs.html

All in all, I remember back when I was an independent contractor paying $575 per month for health insurance just for myself, with no health issues, plus $2,500 deductible. Thus, when I was eligible for Medicare it has been a delight wallet wise for me.
Helpful Answer (1)
Report

I am not a tax accountant, but I think that some of the respondents here do not understand the situation. First of all, Renee sold a rental property, which does not qualify for any sort of capital gains exclusion. Secondly, just because the sale showed a profit on paper, that does not mean that Renee pocketed a huge sum of money. This property could have been fully depreciated and could have been subject to depreciation recapture when it came time to pay the taxes. There might have been a mortgage on the property, which would have needed to be paid with the sale proceeds in order to provide clear title to the buyer. For example, there could have been a taxable gain of $200,000 on a sale of $250,000, and if there was a loan balance of $190,000, by the time selling expenses, the mortgage balance and capital gains taxes were paid, the seller could end up with nothing. Of course, the seller had gotten the advantage of the depreciation claimed in prior years, but that doesn't help him now. There is a difference between income on paper and income in your pocket.

I think that Renee feels that it is unfair for Medicare to charge him a higher premium based on a "paper profit". I don't necessarily agree with his position for the year of the sale, however I agree that it is unfair to be charged a higher premium for three years, based on an increased income in one year. Unfortunately, this is how it is done. If I understand his post correctly, he was charged a higher premium retroactively for the year of the sale, and then for two more years because the premiums are based on tax return numbers that are at least two years old. Anyone who is nearing Medicare eligibility should be aware that your premiums will be based on income at least two years prior to your 65th birthday, and if you are still working with an upper middle class income, will be higher for at least two years after you retire and your income drops. Renee is correct that many people are not aware of this recent change in the law.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

I was thinking that Renee had to pay $28,000 in capital gains tax on his rental property investment that means he made a huge profit on the sale of that rental. That profit should more than make up what extra he needs to pay for Medicare.
Helpful Answer (1)
Report

1 2 3
This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Related
Questions