250. Both Parties After the Employer-tax Exclusion Money

This article re GOP Representative Ryan's Roadmap reveals that the Republicans have a thorny road also towards Health Care. After Goolging employer-tax exclusion, I was presented with a high level explanation from Ezra Klein of the Washington Post. But, the best article I found was one referenced by Mr. Klein here. In short, both parties want to tap the now untaxed, hidden costs of employer Health Care by taxing it and distributing the new revenue. The Dems want to use it on "programs". The Reps want to give it back to the tax payers as a credit. But, the important issues discussed in the latter highlighted article is the unbelievable complexity in the current tax laws that bind this exclusion to not on the normal health care insurance, but also disability, health savings accounts, and other things, meaning it will be a bugger-bear to repeal entirely and no longer easy to dissect. The article also brings up dozens of considerations that have yet to be examined and a few that are practically impossible to predict. The bottom line conclusion of the report was to first decide WHY it should be repealed. Both parties have already decided it should be repealed, but have yet to state the WHY other than to provide real/virtual money to help pay for their reform ideas. Meanwhile, HOW will the repeal affect the lives of taxpayers? I would think the companies providing the Health Care policies would first cut back on all the perks in them to reduce the premium costs, but then also charge the employee more (their apportionment of the cost) while increasing their pay that amount (to give the impression that it's no change in cost) which would now be TAXED. Now, the Republicans would give some or all of it back to the employee as a credit on their tax return (how about those who don't have a large enough income to file taxes?), while the Democrats would run with the new taxes and apply them to new things in their "government" takeover of Health Care. You decide. But consider the complexity in this ONE issue (i.e., read the latter article) and tell me HOW any body can even comprehend the Democratic 2700+ bill when this SINGLE issue is monumental in itself! Hence, why the Republicans want to address the Health Care issues one at a time in a logical order of best return and less risk. This s no longer a Life of Riley -- hey youngsters, see Wikipedia for this ("The expression, 'Living the life of Riley' suggests an ideal contented life, possibly living on someone else's money, time or work."). My head is spinning from just this issue!