[galdosdi]

I would consider just taking the medicaid for a year.

Medicaid can actually be very good quality healthcare, if you're located say, near a very good research hospital in a city with a structural oversupply of medical care due to having a lot of med schools.

I'd rather have medicaid living next to a high quality (non profit) health system, than "nice" insurance living in a shithole. All the insurance in the world can't materialize doctors that aren't there

[dragonwriter]

> I would consider just taking the Medicaid for a year.

ACA subsidy eligibility may be annual, but Medicaid eligibility is based on current monthly income, and if you have a change that makes you ineligible, you lose it. You can’t just decide to “take Medicaid for a year” because you aren’t subsidy-eligible based on prior-year income.

[galdosdi]

So? Isn't losing medicaid an ACA qualifying event? Your income goes up, you lose the medicaid but now qualify for ACA.

That said, in my secondhand experience across multiple states I won't name, the medicaid office probably won't actually find out or do anything before 12 months are up.

Also, a few states are starting to officially enact "continuous eligibility" and intentionally not check your income for 12 months -- mostly for children[1] right now, but some states for adults[2] too.

[1] https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/enrollment-strategies/cont...

[2] https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2...

[creer]

ACA subsidy eligibility is not annual. "Income changed" is a qualifying event.