There's a lot of words in here...and they're wordy words. So I'll stick to the one part that I did understand.
As far as I know, this
happens all the time, new Healthcare bill or not:
"It will cost us quite a bit financially to keep the level of coverage we had last year for our small number of employees. If we want to keep the cost at the prior level, we have to take plans that drastically reduce the benefit levels"
I'm curious about this part though: 'our business runs the risk of being "redetermined" as a new applicant and potentially being denied'.
Is that something specific to your company? Is it only if you change your coverage? Oh and...did your state have (and if so, did it pass) a referendum to make the employer cover all the insurance costs?
When you've employed local people who have become friends due to length of time in the business and excellent skills, loyalty to your employees is extremely important. Reducing the HC plan helps neither the staff or the business. The staff now has to go out of pocket to try and pick up supplemental coverage to restore that which was lost. The business owner must consider a viable raise to help the employee with the additional cost. It is nothing but a circle.
In taking a lesser plan, we are required to cancel our existing coverage. If one of the staff has a pre-existing condition (my wife and I included), we run the risk of the health insurance group denying us or telling us we must now pay another additional to cover the pre-existing condition. Another circle, both translating to higher cost or lost benefits. Any insurance company can deny a formerly covered client who cancels an existing policy and attempts to repurchase.
Its a fact of life, and getting proper coverage with a good provider is no longer that easily done. Redetermination comes with canceling one existing policy to opt for another. Many health insurers can drop a client without allowing a renew when a policy is ended in favor of another type of lesser cost/coverage.
It matters little what Pennsylvania requires or allows regarding the coverage. The employee looks at what he/she has now versus what may come. If I require the employee to pick up partial payment, its still part of the circle. The employee has been penalized in a fashion by the new healthcare law, just as the small business owner has.
There's one company on there that has 2 enrollees. 2! It doesn't get much smaller than that....
The company with 2 employees is not a company, it is a branch of a much larger national union that received a waiver and it was extended to the smaller union offshoot, as well. The question begs why are unions and health insurance providers being given waivers in the first place?