Further, according to analyst projections, eliminating CSR payments would also result in a net increase in
federal costs of $ 2.3 billion2 for fiscal year 2018 as the result of the increased benchmark premium also increasing the premium subsidies.
Some argue they will be able to cut Medicaid eligibility back after the first three years of
federal cost sharing is reduced, but this ignores both the federal government's history of imposing maintenance of effort mandates on states, e.g., during the president's stimulus spending, and also the practical difficulty of taking benefits away.
For example in California, which uses
federal cost estimates as a starting point for state calculations, costs rose from $ 37 million in fiscal year 2010 to $ 85 million in fiscal 2016, an increase of 130 percent, after adjusting for inflation.
Estimated according to the FCRA method,
federal costs under the first alternative would be reduced by $ 7 billion from 2017 to 2026.
Under the second alternative, CBO estimates,
federal costs from 2017 to 2026 would be reduced by $ 12 billion according to the FCRA method and by $ 9 billion according to the fair - value method.
The Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget estimate these proposals would reduce federal Medicaid costs because many states would not find other revenues to replace the provider tax revenues — and would have to cut back their Medicaid programs as a consequence, which in turn would
lower federal costs.
11th District Cost of Funds Index FAQ + National Monthly Median Cost of Funds Index
+ Federal Cost of Funds Index
Consistent with the requirements of the Credit Reform Act of 1990, budget cost estimates for the student loan programs reflect the estimated net present value of all future
non-administrative Federal costs associated with a cohort of loans.
«The U.S. could displace 10 percent of coal energy at no
net federal cost by spending three to four percent of one year's budget on 36,000 to 40,000 large wind turbines and selling the electricity over 20 years, recouping all costs,» they argue.
Hurd partnered with other Republican representatives from border states, including New Mexico and California, on the bill, which seeks to apply technology to the border problem while
undercutting federal cost estimates.
Lawmakers grill DOE chief over his rush request
for federal cost - recovery mandate in the name of grid resiliency.
These include efforts to retract the Clean Power Plan, to eliminate the use of the social cost of carbon as currently constituted
in federal cost / benefit analyses, and acknowledgement the current generation of climate models has no utility with regard to policy.
Note: Besides the 11th District Cost Of Funds index lenders may also use the other Cost Of Funds indexes, e.g. National Monthly Median Cost of Funds,
Federal Cost of Funds.
The current estimate relies on updated baseline projections related to
the federal costs of subsidizing health insurance.
In 2007 about 30 million schoolchildren took part in the National School Lunch Program at
a federal cost of $ 8.7 billion.
Since the cost of implementing the project is above ministerial limits, we sought and obtained the concurrence of the Federal
«My amendment would tell Albany that they would not get
any federal cost sharing for any dollar they collect from any of the 57 counties outside of New York City.
The Federal Cost of Funds Index (COFI) is calculated as the sum of the monthly average interest rates for marketable Treasury bills and for marketable Treasury notes, divided by two, and rounded to three decimal places.
Note: Besides
the Federal Cost of Funds index lenders may also use the other Cost Of Funds indexes, e.g. 11th District Cost Of Funds index, National Monthly Median Cost of Funds.
Click here for a history of
the Federal Cost of Funds Index (Starting from January of 1990).
The Federal Cost of Funds Index Starting from January of 1976 * * The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation first published the Federal Cost of Funds Index in March, 1991.
Estimated according to the FCRA method,
federal costs would be reduced by $ 8 billion under the first alternative and by $ 27 billion under the second alternative from 2017 to 2026.
According to the fair - value method, over the same period,
federal costs would be reduced by $ 5 billion.
According to the fair - value method, over the same period,
federal costs would be reduced by $ 7 billion under the first alternative and by $ 23 billion under the second.
The CAHC report outlines that
federal costs of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits are projected to total $ 38 billion in 2017, $ 48 billion in 2018, and $ 56 billion in 2019.