On January
12th, 2006 Maryland’s Legislature became the first in the nation to pass legislation
requiring all companies with more than 10,000 employees to spend a certain
amount on health care or pay the difference in taxes. It took an override
of the Governor’s veto to get the measure passed. The law would require
any employer with more than 10,000 employees to spend at least 8 percent
of its payroll on employee health care. Today, similar legislation was
filed in the Florida Legislature by Representative Susan Bucher
(D-West Palm Beach).
Please take a moment to read
the press release below outlining AIF’s strong stance against this kind
of legislation.
ASSOCIATED
INDUSTRIES COMES OUT
AGAINST
PAYROLL TAX AND MANDATORY HEALTH CARE
| For Immediate
Release |
Contact |
| January 24, 2006 |
Elizabeth E. Hirst |
| |
850-222-3767 |
Tallahassee – The Associated Industries of Florida (AIF) came out today in complete
opposition to new legislation (HB 813 sponsored by Rep. Susan Bucher)
which would impose a health tax in Florida of 7% to 9% to pay for health
care coverage for employees. This would be the first time in Florida history
that a payroll tax has been levied on employers and the first time that
employers have been required to provide heath care to their employers.
While the bill covers, at this point in time, only employers with 10,000
and more employees, history tells us the proponents are subtly trying
to get their “foot in the door”. Labor unions will surely continue their
efforts to decrease the employee requirement in the future so that the
health mandate covers all employers.
Whether this proposed health
tax affects one employee or ten-thousand, it would prove to be damaging
to Florida’s business climate. AIF projects this could become one of the
costliest taxes ever levied on Florida employers and one that would cause
untold damage to the state’s efforts to recruit and retain high-paying
jobs.
“This bill is a wolf in sheep’s
clothing; it is nothing more than a new and costly tax on businesses.
Florida’s economy is largely driven by smaller business and the service
industry-where profit margins just aren’t large enough to pay for mandated
health insurance. This type of “health tax” would put us at a competitive
disadvantage. It could discourage new businesses from coming to Florida
and may force some of our current businesses out. By leading a task force
made up of business and economic experts we will work to develop a coherent
strategy to defeat this outrageous and unfair proposal,” Barney Bishop,
AIF President.
In Maryland, at the request of the ALF-CIO, legislators passed a bill
in 2005 forcing large employers to insure more of their workers. The Governor
vetoed that bill, but just last week lawmakers voted to override the veto.
With the new law in effect, Maryland companies with more than 10,000 employees
are mandated to spend at least 8% of their payrolls on employee health
benefits.
The AFL-CIO is now focused on passing a similar law in other states including
Florida, Connecticut, Kansas, Colorado and Tennessee. Labor unions are
looking to require each state’s largest private employers to devote 8%
to 11% of their payroll to health insurance or contribute a fee to a state
fund.
Florida already has one of
the largest numbers of insurance mandates in the country which increases
the minimum cost of that health insurance policy to employers and employees,”
said Stephen Joost, Partner/Chief Financial Officer for the Florida-based
Firehouse Subs. If this proposal is passed, it will open Pandora’s Box.
They’ll push every year to lower the minimum employee threshold of businesses
that will be forced to provide costly health insurance coverage.”
During the 2005 Florida Legislative
Session, an amendment was passed by the Senate during the final days that
would have required employers with 10,000 or more employees to spend additional
dollars on health care coverage. AIF worked diligently with lawmakers
to have this highly controversial amendment reconsidered and ultimately
defeated.
The model legislation now
being distributed by labor unions suggests that employers of any size
could be mandated to pay this health tax. According to the AFL-CIO’s background
information…“Although large firms have historically provided nearly universal
coverage, a study by the Commonwealth Fund reports that more than one-quarter
of workers in companies with 500 or more workers do not receive employer-based
coverage.”
In Maryland the legislation
was aimed at companies who have 10,000 employees, but the same proposal
being filed in Rhode Island takes aim at businesses with only 1,000 employees;
where does it stop?
“Forcing employers to provide
mandatory health coverage is a utopian solution, but not a practical one.
In reality it sounds great, but for every benefit there is a cost and
to say that businesses will pay for it is simplistic,” Bishop said. “Just
this week, in remarks to the press, national AFL-CIO President John Sweeney
loudly lamented the exportation of jobs overseas. This proposed idea would
only exacerbate his concern. This payroll health tax will harm our state’s
economic development efforts and our ability to attract high paying jobs
to Florida. The trade-off will be Florida’s vibrant business environment.”
|