
Understanding the Medicare Part A late enrollment penalty
If a person declines Medicare Part A or misses enrollment when they first become eligible, they could face penalties for late enrollment.
There are set periods each year when people can enroll in the different parts of Medicare. Most people first become eligible for Medicare when they turn 65 years old. This triggers an initial enrollment period.
Missing initial enrollment or declining Medicare coverage may lead to penalties when a person goes to enroll at a later date. Penalties take the form of higher monthly premium payments.
Parts A, B, and D all have potential late enrollment penalties.
Learn what the Part A late enrollment penalty is, how it is calculated, and how to avoid it. Part A late enrollment penalty overview
Medicare Part A and Part B make up Original Medicare. Part B covers outpatient medical insurance, and Part A is inpatient hospital insurance.
If a person pays Medicare taxes while working for at least 10 years, they qualify for premium-free Part A. Most Medicare enrollees have no Part A premium.
People who have not paid enough Medicare taxes have to pay a monthly premium of $285 or $518 per month, depending on their tax history. If these individuals do not sign up for Medicare during their initial enrollment period, they may have to pay a late enrollment penalty.
The penalty does not apply to people who qualify for premium-free Part A. Part A penalty calculation
The Part A penalty is a 10% increase in a person's monthly premium payment. They will have to pay this penalty for twice the number of years that they went without Part A.
Here is an example of what this might look like in practice:
A person became eligible for Medicare at 65 years old but did not qualify for premium-free Part A and did not enroll. They went without Medicare Part A for 4 years before deciding to enroll.
Based on their tax history, they have a Part A premium payment of $285. Since they did not enroll in Part A when they first became eligible, they must pay a late enrollment penalty of $28.50 each month (10% of $285). They will pay this penalty for 8 years — twice the length of time that they were without Part A. Part A penalty exceptions
Not everyone who forgoes enrolling in Part A during initial enrollment must pay a late enrollment penalty. If a person qualifies for a special enrollment period (SEP), they typically do not need to pay a late enrollment penalty.
When a person has a life event that affects their health insurance or Medicare coverage, they may qualify for an SEP. SEPs allow people to enroll in Medicare during windows of time that occur directly after these life events. Possible qualifying events include:
losing employer-sponsored health insurance
moving out of your health insurance's coverage area
having a change in marital status
Here is an example: If a person did not qualify for premium-free Part A and chose not to enroll in Part A during initial enrollment because they had health insurance through an employer, they would qualify for an SEP when they lose that job or lose their coverage.
This would trigger an 8-month SEP during which they could enroll in Part A without paying the late enrollment penalty. » Learn more:What to know about the special enrollment periods for Medicare Other late enrollment penalties
The Part A late enrollment penalty is one of a few possible Medicare penalties. There are also late enrollment penalties for Part B and Part D. However, Medicare calculates these penalties differently.
Medicare Part B has a monthly premium for all enrollees. In 2025, this premium is at least $185, though it depends on a person's income. If a person goes without Part B while eligible, they may incur a penalty when they eventually sign up.
The Part B late enrollment penalty increases by 10% for every year that a person goes without Part B. It lasts as long as a person has coverage. In essence, it is a lifelong penalty.
As with Part A, a person can avoid the Part B penalty if they qualify for an SEP.
Medicare Part D is prescription drug coverage. The Part D late enrollment penalty is a 1% increase in the monthly premium payment for each month that a person goes without Part D or comparable drug coverage.
Since Part D plans are offered by private insurance companies and costs vary, the penalty is calculated based on the national base beneficiary premium of $36.78.
As with the Part B penalty, it lasts for as long as a person has coverage.
If a person is not enrolled in Medicare Part A when they are eligible, they may incur a late enrollment penalty when they do go to sign up.
The Part A late enrollment penalty is a 10% increase in the monthly premium. A person pays the penalty for twice as long as they were without Part A (in years).
There are other late enrollment penalties for Part B and Part D, but these are calculated differently.
The information on this website may assist you in making personal decisions about insurance, but it is not intended to provide advice regarding the purchase or use of any insurance or insurance products. Healthline Media does not transact the business of insurance in any manner and is not licensed as an insurance company or producer in any U.S. jurisdiction. Healthline Media does not recommend or endorse any third parties that may transact the business of insurance.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Time to face the harsh realities of spending orthodoxy
Labour came to power fatuously parroting the word 'change' and yet has shown itself to be the same old tax and spending party it has always been. What it meant was a change of party in office not a change of direction. Not only have taxes gone up but so-called protected spending is set to rise despite record debt levels. Yet if ever a public policy has been tested to destruction surely it is the notion that the NHS will improve if only more money is thrown at it. Even Sir Keir Starmer and Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, are on record as saying that higher health spending is not the answer to the endemic flaws in the health service and yet another £30 billion is to be announced for the next three years on top of the £22 billion handed over after last year's general election, much of which went on pay and showed nothing in the way of productivity improvement. No mainstream politician is prepared to acknowledge that the problem with the NHS is the fact it is a nationalised industry with all the inherent inefficiencies associated with such. Most other advanced economies in Europe and elsewhere have social insurance systems which work better. But the insistence in Britain of cleaving to the 1948 'founding principle' that treatment should be free at the point of delivery has become a quasi-religious doctrine that few dare challenge. Only Nigel Farage has questioned the wisdom of continuing with a system that patently fails to achieve what others manage to do but has been noticeably quiet on the subject recently because Labour will exploit it mercilessly to see off the Reform threat. Telling people that they will have to pay for something they have always had for free is even more difficult when political parties are prepared to see the health system get worse rather than reform it. The same is true of welfare. Taking benefits from people, even when they are payments introduced just a few years ago like the winter fuel allowance, is hard if the reasons are not explained and the issue is 'weaponised' by opponents. Yet unless the welfare budget is brought under control it will bankrupt the country. If change is to mean anything then we need politicians finally to understand the extent of the country's difficulties and make decisions accordingly. Will we see that from the Chancellor on Wednesday?


The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Midwife struck off over claim vaccines ‘attacked babies in the womb'
A midwife has been removed from the register after she shared posts on social media claiming that vaccinations harm babies in the womb. Seana Mary Kerr, from Newry in Northern Ireland, also told a pregnant woman in a shop that she should not be wearing a face mask during the Covid-19 pandemic, according to a Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) tribunal panel. Ms Kerr, who had been a registered midwife since 2007, was found by a panel to have placed the woman at 'significant risk of harm' with her views, while she had 'risked seriously undermining the public confidence' in her profession at a crucial time with her posts. In the first of three social media posts in September 2020, Ms Kerr said that babies were being attacked in the womb through vaccination of mothers during pregnancy. Then, in March 2021, she claimed healthcare professionals were being 'complicit' in the national response to Covid-19, and that the health crisis was 'a Trojan horse intend[ed] to introduce a new era for humanity'. A further post in December that year made reference to how a group of people, described as 'they', had been 'planting the seeds' about Covid-19 over Christmas 2020 by referring to 'some bat in China'. Ms Kerr's advice and social media comments were given when she had identified herself as a midwife and was 'promoting her opinion on matters of clinical importance', the panel found. 'The panel considered that the actions of Ms Kerr took place during an exceptionally unusual time, where the entirety of the NHS was mobilised to protect the public from the international Covid-19 pandemic,' they said. 'Therefore, by expressing the view that other healthcare professionals, who Ms Kerr was working with in the Trust, were acting in ways which may cause harm, a view Ms Kerr held which was against the recognised guidance at the time, Ms Kerr risked seriously undermining the public confidence in the profession. 'It further noted that by making these accusations that Ms Kerr's colleagues may have suffered harm while working in an unprecedented and challenging situation.' The midwife approached the pregnant woman in the shop, which was her place of work, during the other allegation in question in August 2020. She identified herself as a midwife before advising the woman that she should not be wearing the face mask as it reduced the amount of oxygen her baby was receiving. Ms Kerr went on to tell the woman that she should not receive a flu vaccination as this would increase the risk of her baby being stillborn. The panel found the pregnant woman and her family were caused 'significant emotional harm' as a result of Ms Kerr's behaviour. 'The panel noted that it is a reasonable expectation of everyone working in a public environment, such as a shop, that they will not be approached and given personal, clinical advice and that such advice would normally only be given during a private clinical appointment or at an antenatal class,' they said. 'Therefore, by approaching Patient A in her place of work, outside a clinical relationship, unsolicited, Ms Kerr placed her at significant risk of harm.' The panel found Ms Kerr's fitness to practise was still impaired and that there was a risk of the individual repeating her behaviour. Ms Kerr did not show any remorse for her misconduct or demonstrate any insight into her previous actions, and had not engaged with the NMC since June 2022, the panel said. It made an order to strike Ms Kerr's name from the register, after a 12-month suspension order had previously been imposed last year.


Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
My elderly parents have become cantankerous and refuse to listen to reason
Dear A&E, My parents, who are in their 70s, are driving my three siblings and me mad. They are vague with information, complain endlessly about everything but don't seem to want any actual solutions. They have various health issues but they just moan about the doctors without seeing anything through. They are panicking about money but don't want any support: one minute they are selling their house and the next they are not. How can we make them handle things more practically, or let us do it for them? – Infuriated Dear Infuriated, We have a feeling that a lot of people reading your dilemma will be saying, 'Hmm'. Why? Well, it just might be that you are at Everest base camp, complaining about the altitude and the cold, rather than looking up and thinking, 'Holy hell – this is the easy bit. We are going to have to equip ourselves to get up that mountain – as a team.' Brace yourself, Infuriated: your parents are only going to get more frustrating and, probably, crosser. Information is only going to become more opaque. They will likely continue to ignore your advice, and you have no real idea how it's all going to play out. You have little agency here. And, quite frankly (here's the shocking bit), they may be old, but it's still their life and their business. We are telling you right at the top of this column: choose love. Let go of any illusion that you are going to somehow wrestle control, or that you are going to say one thing and all the cards are going to magically fall into place. Instead, be a sympathetic ear, listen without judgment and don't wear yourself out before you even start the real climb. Do you remember what it was like being a teenager? You might have teenagers now and are watching them do all sorts of stupid things (as you once did). Did you listen to advice then? Are your teenagers taking notes and nodding enthusiastically as you dispense your wisdom, telling them they should put their studies first or eat more greens or go for a walk? What you wanted from your parents then was just love and minimal intervention, and this is what they want from you now: an understanding ally for when getting a doctor's appointment is impossible, the hospital parking is impossible and the price of whatever is impossible. They don't want your projections or your spreadsheets, just as you didn't want theirs. Sometimes all you need to do is learn how to listen to people complain or wobble, without immediately leaping to offer advice or to fix it. It's also important to remember that your parents, frustrating and teetering as they may be, might not be ready to sign over their lives; to hand over their decisions; to sell the home they have spent 50 years maintaining. Even though you may feel strongly that you're right, it's a decision that you would make within the context of your life right now – when you are busy and organised and energised. You may not make the same decision 35 years down the line. So, deep breaths. Listen. If you are still desperate to 'help', you could try a subtle approach. When they're not in the middle of downloading their discontent while also rejecting any advice, you might be able to say something like, 'By the way, if you would like to create a bible of all your passwords, bank accounts and insurance details, so it's all there for you in one place, I'd be really happy to do it.' Make these kinds of suggestions far away from any exasperation or conflict, not when they're moaning about something you've heard them drone on about before, while you are already fizzing and furious. Instead, try 'I was just thinking, would it be helpful if I did this?' You might get a no every time. But one yes might slip through. We know this is not easy, dear Irritated. While you are busy trying and failing to take care of them in the way you wish to, you are also going to have to honour your own sense of being a child. Respect the fact that, while you're responding as a frustrated midlifer who understands things such as power of attorney, you're also responding as a teenager who finds everything your parents do intolerable, and as a five-year-old who loves them more than you love anyone – and thinks that they can solve every problem in the world. All those things are happening at the same time. And that is what makes this painful. Love your parents and communicate with your siblings, because this is only going to get more arduous and, ultimately, sad. You and your siblings should try to be a cohesive, united front who can share and support each other, whatever is coming your way. Your parents are going to do what they are going to do. It might get hairy, but really, after all is said and done, you want to be left with good relationships. Choose love, not lectures; and look for the glimmers. You will need them to see you through this.