logo
How 17M Americans with Medicaid, ACA plans could lose health insurance

How 17M Americans with Medicaid, ACA plans could lose health insurance

UPI15-07-2025
July 15 (UPI) -- The big tax and spending package President Donald Trump signed into law July 4 will cut government spending on health care by more than $1 trillion over the next decade.
Because the final version of the legislation moved swiftly through the Senate and the House, estimates regarding the number of people likely to lose their health insurance coverage were incomplete when Congress approved it by razor-thin margins.
Nearly 12 million Americans could lose their health insurance coverage by 2034 due to this legislation, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
However, the number of people losing their insurance by 2034 could be even higher, totaling more than 17 million. That's largely because it's likely that at least 5 million Americans who currently have Affordable Care Act marketplace health insurance will lose their coverage once subsidies that help fund those policies expire at the end of 2025. And very few Republicans have said they support renewing the subsidies.
In addition, regulations the Trump administration introduced earlier in the year will further increase the number of people losing their ACA marketplace coverage.
As a public health professor, I see these changes, which will be phased in over several years, as the first step in a reversal of the expansion of access to health care that began with the ACA's passage in 2010.
About 25.3 million Americans lacked insurance in 2023, down sharply from 46.5 million when President Barack Obama signed the ACA into law. All told, the changes in the works could eliminate three-quarters of the progress the United States has made in reducing the number of uninsured Americans following the Affordable Care Act.
Millions will lose their Medicaid coverage
The biggest number of people becoming uninsured will be Americans enrolled in Medicaid, which currently covers more than 78 million people.
An estimated 5 million will eventually lose Medicaid coverage due to new work requirements that will go into effect nationally by 2027.
Work requirements target people eligible for Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act's expansion. They tend to have slightly higher incomes than other people enrolled in the program.
Medicaid applicants who are between 19 and 64 years old will need to certify they are working at least 80 hours a month or spending that much time engaged in comparable activities, such as community service.
When these rules have been introduced to other safety net programs, most people lost their benefits due to administrative hassles, not because they weren't logging enough hours on the job. Experts like me expect to see that occur with Medicaid, too.
Other increases in the paperwork required to enroll in and remain enrolled in Medicaid will render more than 2 million more people uninsured, the CBO estimates.
And an additional 1.4 million would lose coverage because they may not meet new citizenship or immigration requirements.
In total, these changes to Medicaid would lead to more than 8 million people becoming uninsured by 2034.
Many of those who aren't kicked out of Medicaid would also face new copayments of up to $35 for appointments and procedures -- making them less likely to seek care, even if they still have health insurance.
The new policies also make it harder for states to pay for Medicaid, which is run by the federal government and the states. They do so by limiting the taxes states charge medical providers, which are used to fund the states' share of Medicaid funding. With less funding, some states may try to reduce enrollment or cut benefits, such as home-based health care, in the future.
Losing Medicaid coverage may leave millions of low-income Americans without insurance coverage, with no affordable alternatives for health care. Historically, the people who are most likely to lose their benefits are low-income people of color or immigrants who do not speak English well.
The new law will also make it harder for the more than 24 million Americans who currently get health insurance through Affordable Care Act marketplace plans to remain insured.
For one, it will be much harder for Americans to purchase insurance coverage and qualify for subsidies for 2026.
These changes come on the heels of regulations from the Trump administration that the Congressional Budget Office estimates will lead to almost 1 million people losing their coverage through the ACA marketplace. This includes reducing spending on outreach and enrollment.
What's more, increased subsidies in place since 2021 are set to expire at the end of the year. Given Republican opposition, it seems unlikely that those subsidies will be extended.
Not extending the subsidies alone could mean premiums will increase by more than 75% in 2026. Once premiums get that unaffordable, an additional 4.2 million Americans could lose coverage, the Congressional Budget Office estimates.
With more political uncertainty and reduced enrollment, more private insurers may also withdraw from the ACA market. Large insurance companies such as Aetna, Cigna and UnitedHealth have already raised concerns about the ACA market's viability.
Should they exit, there would be fewer choices and higher premiums for people getting their insurance this way. It could also mean that some counties could have no ACA plans offered at all.
Ramifications for the uninsured and rural hospitals
When people lose their health insurance, they inevitably end up in worse health and their medical debts can mount. Because medical treatments usually work better when diagnoses are made early, people who end up uninsured may die sooner than if they'd still had coverage.
Having to struggle to pay the kinds of high medical bills people without insurance face takes a physical, mental and financial toll, not just on people who become uninsured, but also their families and friends. It also harms medical providers that don't get reimbursed for their care.
Public health scholars like me have no doubt that many hospitals and other health care providers will have to make tough choices. Some will close. Others will offer fewer services and fire health care workers. Emergency room wait times will increase for everyone, not just people who lose their health insurance due to changes in Trump's tax and spending package.
Rural hospitals, which were already facing a funding crisis, will experience some of the most acute financial pressure. By one estimate, more than 300 hospitals are at risk of closing.
Children's hospitals and hospitals in low-income urban areas also disproportionately rely on Medicaid and will struggle to keep their doors open.
Republicans tried to protect rural hospitals by designating $50 billion in the legislative package for them over 10 years. But this funding comes nowhere near the $155 billion in losses KFF expects those health care providers to incur due to Medicaid cuts. Also, the funding comes with a number of restrictions that could further limit its effectiveness.
What's next
Some Republicans, including Sens. Mike Crapo and Ron Johnson, have already indicated that more health care policy changes could be coming in another large legislative package.
They could include some of the harsher provisions that were left out of the final version of the legislation Congress approved. Republicans may, for example, try to roll back the ACA's Medicaid expansion.
Moving forward, spending on Medicare, the insurance program that primarily covers Americans 65 and older, could decline, too. Without any further action, the CBO says that the law could trigger an estimated $500 billion in mandatory Medicare cuts from 2026 to 2034 because of the trillions of dollars in new federal debt the law creates.
Trump has repeatedly promised not to cut Medicare or Medicaid. And yet, it's possible that the Trump administration will issue executive orders that further reduce what the federal government spends on health care -- and roll back the coverage gains the Affordable Care Act brought about.
Portions of this article first appeared in a related piece published June 13.
Simon F. Haeder is an associate professor of public health at Texas A&M University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The opinions in this commentary are solely those of the author.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US, China to launch new talks on tariff truce extension, easing path for Trump-Xi meeting
US, China to launch new talks on tariff truce extension, easing path for Trump-Xi meeting

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

US, China to launch new talks on tariff truce extension, easing path for Trump-Xi meeting

By David Lawder STOCKHOLM (Reuters) -Top U.S. and Chinese economic officials will resume talks in Stockholm on Monday to try to tackle longstanding economic disputes at the centre of a trade war between the world's top two economies, aiming to extend a truce by three months and keeping sharply higher tariffs at bay. China is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with President Donald Trump's administration, after Beijing and Washington reached preliminary deals in May and June to end weeks of escalating tit-for-tat tariffs and a cut-off of rare earth minerals. Without an agreement, global supply chains could face renewed turmoil from U.S. duties snapping back to triple-digit levels that would amount to a bilateral trade embargo. The Stockholm talks come hot on the heels of Trump's biggest trade deal yet with the European Union on Sunday for a 15% tariff on most EU goods exports to the U.S., including autos. The bloc will also buy $750 billion worth of American energy and make $600 billion worth of U.S. investments in coming years. No similar breakthrough is expected in the U.S.-China talks but trade analysts said that another 90-day extension of a tariff and export control truce struck in mid-May was likely. An extension of that length would prevent further escalation and facilitate planning for a potential meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in late October or early November. A U.S. Treasury spokesperson declined comment on a South China Morning Post report quoting unnamed sources as saying the two sides would refrain from introducing new tariffs or other steps that could escalate the trade war for another 90 days. Trump's administration is poised to impose new sectoral tariffs that will impact China within weeks, including on semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, ship-to-shore cranes and other products. "We're very close to a deal with China. We really sort of made a deal with China, but we'll see how that goes," Trump told reporters on Sunday before European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen struck their tariff deal. DEEPER ISSUES Previous U.S.-China trade talks in Geneva and London in May and June focused on bringing U.S. and Chinese retaliatory tariffs down from triple-digit levels and restoring the flow of rare earth minerals halted by China and Nvidia's H20 AI chips and other goods halted by the United States. So far, the talks have not delved into broader economic issues. They include U.S. complaints that China's state-led, export-driven model is flooding world markets with cheap goods, and Beijing's complaints that U.S. national security export controls on tech goods seek to stunt Chinese growth. "Geneva and London were really just about trying to get the relationship back on track so that they could, at some point, actually negotiate about the issues which animate the disagreement between the countries in the first place," said Scott Kennedy, a China economics expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "I'd be surprised if there is an early harvest on some of these things but an extension of the ceasefire for another 90 days seems to be the most likely outcome," Kennedy said. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has already flagged a deadline extension and has said he wants China to rebalance its economy away from exports to more domestic consumption -- a decades-long goal for U.S. policymakers. Analysts say the U.S.-China negotiations are far more complex than those with other Asian countries and will require more time. China's grip on the global market for rare earth minerals and magnets, used in everything from military hardware to car windshield wiper motors, has proved to be an effective leverage point on U.S. industries. TRUMP-XI MEETING? In the background of the talks is speculation about a possible meeting between Trump and Xi in late October. Trump has said he will decide soon on a landmark trip to China, and a new flare-up of tariffs and export controls would likely derail planning. Sun Chenghao, a fellow at Tsinghua University's Center for International Security and Strategy in Beijing, said that a Trump-Xi summit would be an opportunity for the U.S. to lower the 20% tariffs on Chinese goods related to fentanyl. In exchange, he said the Chinese side could make good on its 2020 pledge to increase purchases of U.S. farm products and other goods. "The future prospect of the heads of state summit is very beneficial to the negotiations because everyone wants to reach an agreement or pave the way in advance," Sun said. Still, China will likely request a reduction of multi-layered U.S. tariffs totaling 55% on most goods and further easing of U.S. high-tech export controls, analysts said. Beijing has argued that such purchases would help reduce the U.S. trade deficit with China, which reached $295.5 billion in 2024. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

Hong Kong's CK Hutchison seeks Chinese investor to join Panama Ports deal
Hong Kong's CK Hutchison seeks Chinese investor to join Panama Ports deal

The Hill

time24 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Hong Kong's CK Hutchison seeks Chinese investor to join Panama Ports deal

HONG KONG (AP) — A Hong Kong conglomerate that's selling ports at the Panama Canal said Monday it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers, a move that could please Beijing but bring more U.S. scrutiny to the geopolitically fraught deal. CK Hutchison Holdings' initial plan to sell its port assets to a group that includes U.S. investment firm BlackRock Inc. pleased President Donald Trump, who has alleged that China interferes with the critical shipping lane's operations in Panama. However, they apparently angered Beijing and drew a review from Chinese anti-monopoly authorities. A Beijing-backed newspaper posted scathing commentaries about the deal, with one describing it as a betrayal of all Chinese. Beijing's offices overseeing Hong Kong affairs have reposted some of these commentaries, widely seen as an indication of Chinese leaders' stance. A Hutchison subsidiary has operated ports at both ends of the Panama Canal since 1997. After months of uncertainty brought by tensions between Washington and Beijing, Hutchison said in a statement that the exclusive negotiations period with the consortium has expired. However, it added 'the Group remains in discussions with members of the consortium with a view to inviting major strategic investor from the PRC to join as a significant member of the consortium,' referring to the People's Republic of China. It said they needed to change the membership of the consortium and the structure of the transaction for the deal to be able to pass reviews by 'all relevant authorities.' The awkward position Hutchison found itself in for months highlights the challenges Hong Kong business elites face in navigating Beijing's expectations of national loyalty, especially when relations between China and the United States are strained. Hong Kong has overhauled its electoral system to ensure the city is run by 'patriots.' CK Hutchison is owned by the family of Hong Kong's richest man, Li Ka-shing. It announced March 4 that it would sell all its shares in Hutchison Port Holdings and in Hutchison Port Group Holdings to the consortium that also includes BlackRock subsidiary Global Infrastructure Partners and Terminal Investment Limited, a subsidiary of the Mediterranean Shipping Company. In May, Hutchinson co-managing director, Dominic Lai told shareholders that Terminal Investment was the main investor. Its parent company is led by Italian shipping scion Diego Aponte, whose family reportedly has a longstanding relationship with Li's. The initial deal, valued at nearly $23 billion including $5 billion in debt, would have given the consortium control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including the ports of Balboa and Cristobal, located at either end of the canal. That agreement also required approval from Panama's government. The deadline for their exclusive negotiation period ended on July 27.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store