Tips & Advices

California’s Health Insurance Penalty Undermines Medical Autonomy

Published

5 days ago

July 29, 2025

Listen to the article here:

When the Obama Administration implemented the Affordable Care Act, taxpayers became legally mandated to have health insurance. Unless they qualified for a coverage exemption, the uninsured were subject to a tax penalty. This penalty was reduced to $0 in 2019, but some states took matters into their own hands. As of 2024, California is one of only four states in the nation that penalizes residents financially for not having medical insurance.

The California penalty is at least $900 per adult and $450 per dependent. An uninsured family of four would owe at least $2,700. The penalty does not apply to individuals whose income is below California’s minimum filing threshold of $22,273 in 2025. There is also a limited set of exemptions from the penalty, such as an exclusion for having certain religious beliefs. Residents can also have short coverage gaps of three consecutive months or fewer without being penalized.

California residents should not be coerced into buying health insurance. The state’s health insurance penalty undermines freedom of choice and medical autonomy. California should eliminate its penalty or, at the very minimum, expand the religious conscience exemption to include secular voluntary rejection of the medical system.

Whether for religious reasons, lack of perceived value, or risk preferences, those who do not believe that medical insurance is right for them should not be forced to pay for it. The current system is equivalent to forcing individuals who never want to visit Disneyland to buy an annual park pass.

In California, hospitals must treat people during emergencies regardless of their insurance status or ability to pay. However, patients are still responsible for the cost of treatment. This means that even if the penalty for being uninsured were eliminated, individuals could not simply free ride on the healthcare system.

If the government forced people to purchase digital streaming subscriptions, it would be considered a massive violation of individual freedom. Health insurance is no different; it should be treated just like any other form of consumption.

Forcing people to subsidize the risk of others is not a progressive policy. California must recognize its residents’ diverse health beliefs and respect their right to make insurance decisions without facing financial penalties.

Source link