How Will the Debt-Limit Deal Affect Seniors?

Congress has agreed to allow the President to raise the debt ceiling in exchange for $2.4 trillion in budget cuts over 10 years. How this deal will affect the three major programs crucial to the elderly — Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — may not be known until almost year’s end, but the impact could be significant.

The agreement calls for two stages of spending reductions. In the first stage, which will pare $917 billion from the budget, “entitlement” programs like Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid are spared. Instead, the cuts are evenly divided between defense and non-defense “discretionary” programs. Some aging and poverty programs that the elderly rely on, such as heating assistance, could be hit with budget reductions, but so will defense programs.

In the second stage, a 12-member Congressional committee – six members from each party — must agree on an additional $1.5 trillion in cuts by Thanksgiving, and Congress must vote on their proposal (with no modifications) by December 23. Here, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will all be back on the table. In the case of Medicare, the powerful panel will be looking at changes like raising the eligibility age, increasing premiums for wealthy recipients, hiking deductibles and co-pays, and slashing payments to providers and drug companies.

To cut Medicaid, this joint committee will consider giving states more flexibility to reduce eligibility and benefits, meaning that it might become even tougher for elderly nursing home residents to qualify for Medicaid. The committee will also be looking at cutting payments to nursing homes, which just got hit with a more than 11 percent reduction. Nursing home residents could feel the impact in the form of reduced services and compromised care.

For Social Security, one thing the panel will undoubtedly consider changing is how the program’s cost of living increase is calculated, which will result in lower benefits. Pushing back the eligibility age for future retirees could also be on the table.

Although President Obama will be pressing the joint committee to not just cut programs but to increase revenues by raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations, it is anybody’s guess whether the panel’s Republican members will agree to this.

“The future of the programs really hangs in the balance,” said Joe Baker, president of the Medicare Rights Center, an advocacy group. “It could lead to deep cuts and irreversible changes to Medicare and Medicaid that shift costs to beneficiaries.”

If the 12-member panel can’t agree on a plan to pare at least $1.2 trillion from the budget — or Congress votes down its proposal or President Obama vetoes it — automatic spending cuts totaling that amount would kick in beginning in 2013. Medicaid, Social Security and veterans programs are among the programs that will be exempt from these mandatory cuts, but Medicare is not exempt. There would be a 2 percent cut to Medicare, although the savings would have to come from payments to providers like doctors and hospitals, not from beneficiaries. Such a reduction to providers would be on top of a 6 percent drop in provider payments already enacted to help finance health care reform. Doctors and hospitals would feel the impact initially, but Medicare beneficiaries would experience it soon enough as more providers refuse to treat Medicare patients, reduce services or go out of business.

There is, however, a strong incentive for the joint committee to avoid these automatic cuts and instead agree on a plan that Congress can pass and the President can sign: Along with the 2 percent automatic Medicare cut would be an automatic 8 percent reduction in defense spending, or nearly $500 billion. The thinking is that both Democrats and Republicans would view defense cuts of this magnitude as too damaging to their parties to contemplate.

Further reading:

“Five cuts the debt commission might make to Medicare, Medicaid” (Washington Post blog)

“FAQ: Debt Deal ‘Super’ Committee’s Impact On Health Spending Explained” (Kaiser Family Foundation Health News)

“Tea Party groups see Medicare overhaul chance” (Reuters)

“Social Security, Medicare dodge bullet, but cuts loom” (Reuters blog)

“Debt Deal Triggers Nerves In Health Industry; Providers Brace For Cuts” (Kaiser Family Foundation Health News)

“What Does the Debt Ceiling Agreement Mean for Medicare?” (Center for Medicare Advocacy, Inc.)

Two Tax Court Decisions Clarify When Long-Term Care Expenses Are Deductible

Long-term care can be very expensive, but many long-term care expenses can be deducted from your taxes. Two important recent decisions by the U.S. Tax Court provide guidance on when caregiving services are deductible. In one decision, the court ruled that payments to non-medical caregivers are still deductible as medical expenses; in the other, the court held that a written agreement is required in order for a deceased woman’s estate to deduct more than $1 million in care that her son allegedly provided her.

In the first case, Estate of Lillian Baral (U.S. Tax Ct., No. 3618-10, July 5, 2011), Lillian Baral suffered from dementia and her doctor recommended that she get 24-hour-a-day care. Her brother hired caregivers to assist Ms. Baral with daily activities. On her tax return, Ms. Baral included a deduction for medical expenses for the payments to the caregivers. The IRS said the expenses were not deductible and asked for more money. Following Ms. Baral’s death, her estate appealed the matter to the U.S. Tax Court.

Under tax law, expenses for medical care may be claimed as an itemized deduction if they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. (Note that this threshold will rise to 10 percent of adjusted gross income in 2012.) The definition of medical expenses includes the cost of long-term care if a doctor has determined you are chronically ill. “Chronically ill” means you need help with activities like eating, going to the bathroom, bathing, and dressing, or you require substantial supervision due to a severe cognitive impairment.

The Tax Court agreed with Ms. Baral that the payments to the caregivers for assisting and supervising Ms. Baral are deductible medical expenses. The expenses qualified as long-term care services even though the caregivers were not medical personnel because a doctor had found that the services provided to Ms. Baral were necessary due to her dementia.

In the second case, Estate of Olivo v. Commissioner (U.S. Tax Ct., No. 15428-07, July 11, 2011), New Jersey resident Anthony Olivo provided nearly full-time care to his mother from 1994 to 2003, during which time he largely abandoned his practice as an attorney. After his mother died, Mr. Olivo became administrator of her estate.

Mr. Olivo filed a tax return for the estate and claimed a deduction of $1.24 million as a debt he said the estate owed him for the care he had provided his mother over the years. He claimed he had an oral agreement with his mother that after she died she would compensate him for his services. The IRS disallowed the deduction and Mr. Olivo filed a petition with the Tax Court.

The U.S. Tax Court agreed with the IRS that the estate is not entitled to the deduction. Applying the law in New Jersey, which presumes that services to a family member living in the same household are given for free (many states have similar laws), the court ruled that without a written agreement between Ms. Olivo and her son, it must assume that Mr. Olivo provided the services without any expectation he would be repaid.

To determine if your long-term care expenses are deductible, please email the Elder Law Center or call 630-844-0065. The Elder Law Center is located in Aurora, IL, Kane County, in the Chicago Western Suburbs.