Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Just the Facts: What Happens If Enhanced Health Care Tax Credits End in 2025

The expiration of pandemic-era tax credits may double costs for middle-class and low-income families.

News

A stethoscope lying on top of credit cards.

Enhanced health care tax credits expire at the end of 2025 unless Congress acts. Learn who benefits, what’s at risk, and how premiums could rise without them.

Getty Images, yavdat

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

There’s been a lot in the news lately about healthcare costs going up on Dec. 31 unless congress acts. What are the details?

The enhanced health care premium tax credits (ePTCs) are set to expire at the end of 2025 unless Congress acts to extend them.


What is the breakdown of what they are and who benefits?

Premium tax credits are subsidies created under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to help people afford health insurance purchased through the ACA marketplaces. They reduce the monthly premium cost based on your income and household size.

  • Original ACA credits: Available to people earning between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level.
  • Enhanced credits (ePTCs): Introduced in 2021 via the American Rescue Plan and extended through 2025 by the Inflation Reduction Act. These:
    • Made coverage free or nearly free for those under 150% of the poverty level.
    • Removed the 400% income cap, allowing middle-income earners (e.g., up to $128,600 for a family of four) to qualify.
    • Capped premiums at 8.5% of household income for higher earners.

Who gets these credits?

  • Low-income individuals and families: Those earning between 100%–150% of the federal poverty level often pay $0 for benchmark plans.
  • Middle-income earners: Previously excluded, now eligible if they earn above 400% of the poverty level.
  • Self-employed and small business owners: Especially benefit if they don’t have access to employer-sponsored coverage.

What happens if they expire?

  • Premiums could double for many enrollees in 2026.
  • Millions may drop coverage due to affordability issues.
  • Insurers are already planning rate hikes, anticipating a drop in healthy enrollees and a rise in average claims costs.

What is the impact depending on income level?

  • Income $14,580–$21,870 (100%–150% FPL) – Current Premium: $0 – New Premium if Credits Expire: $387/year
  • Income $21,870–$29,160 (150%–200% FPL) – Current Premium: ~$160/year – New Premium if Credits Expire: $905/year
  • Income $29,160–$36,450 (200%–250% FPL) – Current Premium: ~$1,033/year – New Premium if Credits Expire: $2,615/year
  • Income $36,450–$58,320 (250%–400% FPL) – Current Premium: Capped at ~8.5% of income – New Premium if Credits Expire: $1,400/year (varies by state)
  • Income above $58,320 (>400% FPL) – Current Premium: ~$2,900/year (with credits) – New Premium if Credits Expire: Full cost of benchmark plan (often $3,000+ increase)

What are the arguments by Republicans for allowing the credits to expire?

  • COVID-era spending should sunset: Many Republicans argue that the enhanced credits were part of emergency pandemic relief and should not be made permanent without broader reform. As Rep. Jen Kiggans (R-VA) put it, “It is time to end all COVID-related incentives,” though she also acknowledged the need to protect families from sudden cost increases.
  • Opposition to expanding Obamacare: The enhanced credits were created and extended through Democratic legislation (American Rescue Plan and Inflation Reduction Act), which Republicans opposed. Some view extending these subsidies as entrenching a policy they’ve long sought to repeal or reform.
  • Need for structural reform: Fiscal conservatives argue that the ACA subsidies distort the insurance market and should be revisited holistically. Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said, “I think in all likelihood, they need to be reformed. But this is an overreach to try to do this on a permanent basis.”

What are Democrats’ arguments on why it is wrong to allow the credits to expire?

  • Coverage Loss and Rising Uninsured Rates: Democrats warn that millions of Americans would lose coverage or face unaffordable premiums. The expiration would disproportionately affect working families, older adults, and communities of color. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) called it “a recipe for disaster for families who are already stretched thin.”
  • Middle-Class Protection: The enhanced credits removed the income cap, helping middle-income earners afford coverage for the first time. Democrats argue that reversing this would punish people who earn just above the poverty threshold but still struggle with high premiums.
  • Moral and Equity Imperative: Many Democrats see health care as a right, not a privilege. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said, “We should be expanding access to health care, not ripping it away from millions of Americans.”
  • Political Accountability: Democrats argue that Republicans are playing politics with people’s lives by refusing to extend the credits. They point out that the credits were popular and effective, and letting them expire would be a deliberate choice to increase hardship.
  • Cost of Inaction: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that premiums could double for some enrollees. Democrats argue that the fiscal cost of increased uninsured rates and emergency care far outweighs the cost of maintaining the credits.

What is the impact on the deficit if the credits are allowed to continue?

The CBO has estimated an increase of $350 billion to the deficit. There are possible offsetting factors that are not included in the deficit score, such as lower uncompensated care costs for hospitals, improved public health outcomes, and increased labor market participation due to coverage stability, but there is no way of determining the extent of any savings.

Have Democrats offered any suggestions to address the deficit issues?

Democrats and health policy allies are offering suggestions to offset the projected $350 billion cost of permanently extending the enhanced ACA premium tax credits, though formal negotiations remain politically stalled. Some of the proposals are:

  • Targeted Eligibility Limits: Scale back eligibility from the current uncapped income threshold to a ceiling like 600% of the federal poverty level (about $200,000 for a family of four).
  • Progressive Phase-Out Model: Extend full subsidies only up to 300% of poverty, then gradually phase out assistance for higher incomes.
  • Smaller Alternative Subsidy Formula: Set new subsidies halfway between the original ACA formula and the enhanced version.
  • Health System Reforms as Offsets: Democrats and budget experts have floated ideas like prescription drug pricing reforms, site-neutral payment policies, Medicare Advantage payment adjustments, and reducing waste and fraud in ACA enrollment systems.

David Nevins is publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.


Read More

Gerrymandering: The Maps Shaping Power Ahead of the 2026 Midterms
After Virginia Special Election, The Gerrymandering War Escalates Again

Gerrymandering: The Maps Shaping Power Ahead of the 2026 Midterms

Gerrymandering, the strategic manipulation of voting district boundaries to benefit certain political parties or candidates, has once again taken center stage as this year’s primary elections approach. Though redistricting is typically marked by the decennial census, mid-decade redistricting has become more common across the U.S. since the early 2000s.

The aim of redistricting is to ensure that representative assemblies within a state continue to accurately represent their constituents as population demographics shift over time; however, since the early 1800s, this system has been exploited by U.S. political parties seeking to manipulate voting outcomes in their favor. The same can be said about the current election cycle.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top of the U.S. Supreme Court House

Congress advances a reconciliation bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security while passing key rural legislation. As debates over ICE funding, wildfire policy, and broadband expansion unfold, lawmakers also face new questions about the use of AI in government.

Getty Images, Bloomberg Creative

Starting Up the Reconciliation Machine

This week the Senate began the long, procedure-heavy process of creating and passing a reconciliation bill in order to enact Republican priorities without requiring any votes from Democratic legislators: funding the parts of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) whose funding remains lapsed and additional funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Also this week, the House agreed to two bills that next go to the President and voted on a number of bills related to rural areas.

Two New Laws Soon

Both of these bills go to the President next for signing:

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Director Requests Additional $5.4 Billion at Congressional Budget Hearing

CBP Chief Rodney Scott (left), Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons (middle) and USCIS Director Joseph Edlow (right) testify at budget hearing.

Jamie Gareh/Medill News Service)

ICE Director Requests Additional $5.4 Billion at Congressional Budget Hearing

WASHINGTON- The acting director of ICE on Thursday told Congress that while the Trump administration pumped $75 billion extra into ICE over four years, many activities remain cash starved and the agency needs about $5.4 billion in additional funding for 2027.

There’s misinformation with the Big Beautiful Bill that ICE is fully funded,” said Todd Lyons, acting director of ICE, whose resignation was announced later that day.

Keep ReadingShow less
Illinois House Passes Bill to Restrict Construction of Immigration Detention Centers in Communities

The Illinois State Capitol Building, in Springfield, Illinois on MAY 05, 2012.

(Photo By Raymond Boyd/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images)

Illinois House Passes Bill to Restrict Construction of Immigration Detention Centers in Communities

The Illinois House passed a legislative proposal in a 72-35 partisan vote that would restrict where immigration detention centers can be built, located or operated in the state.

House Bill 5024 would amend state code so that an immigration detention center cannot be located, constructed, or operated by the federal government within 1,500 feet of a home or apartment complex, as well as any school, day care center, public park, or house of worship. Current detention facilities in the state would not be affected by the legislation.

Keep ReadingShow less