Excise tax on 'Cadillac' health-care plans is a bad idea

FSAs, as they're known, allow workers to set aside pretax income to pay for medical expenses, such as co-pays and over-the-counter drugs, that aren't covered by insurance. But employers, who pay little for FSAs except for administrative costs, would be forced to pay a 40 percent, non-tax-deductible excise tax on part of employees' FSA accounts if a plan's premiums plus FSAs plus other stuff exceed certain thresholds. Employers won't offer FSAs if there's a chance they'd have to pay an excise tax as a result. This would increase workers' taxable incomes.

I'm not sure whether FSAs (which I use to the max) are good public policy. Ditto for medical savings accounts. But if we want to eliminate or trim these accounts, let's have an open discussion, not do it through the back door.

In case you're interested, this tax would not affect me in any serious way. And I'm not a catspaw for organized labor, which is opposing the tax. I just think it discriminates unfairly against people who are more expensive to insure because they're older, live in high-cost areas or both. But if this excise tax can regrow hair . . . I'm willing to take another look.

Allan Sloan is Fortune magazine's senior editor at large.