Three years ago, after the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (ACA) passed, I wrote an article entitled “ObamaCare is the Worst Legislation in 75 Years.” As more of the effects of the law have become apparent, that assessment has only been reconfirmed.

I wrote, “The recently passed health-care legislation marks a crucial turning point in the economics of our country. It is impossible to predict all the unintended consequences that will result from such a sweeping increase of federal powers.”

Three years later, some of the unintended consequences of ACA have revealed themselves. In particular, it isn’t good for multiple-location restaurants and the starter jobs they create.

ACA encourages everyone to get health-care insurance by punishing those who don’t. The premium costs and health-care coverage of these insurance policies are regulated. Anyone who refuses to buy health insurance or doesn’t get it through his/her employer must pay a fine of 2.5 percent of their income or $2,085, whichever is larger.

Starting in 2015, businesses with at least 50 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees are required to provide health care for their full-time workers or pay a total yearly fine of $2,000 per each employee they have in excess of 30. (Note: the Obama Administration recently pushed this mandate back one year from its original Jan. 1, 2014 start date.)

Full time is defined as working 30 or more hours per week. Part-time workers are also counted toward the 50-employee cap by taking the number of hours they work per month divided by 120 hours.

Although part-time workers are counted to determine size, they are not counted when determining the penalty to the firm. As a result, firms have an incentive to keep part-time workers, thus avoiding paying a fine for them, even if they have over 50 FTE employees.

Companies with fewer than 50 FTE employees are exempt from these fines as well as many other burdensome federal employment regulations. Economically, this is fortunate. Most hiring happens in smaller firms, whereas larger firms often consolidate their workforce to reduce expenses. Burdening small firms would have extended unemployment even longer.

These smaller companies have a great incentive to keep their employee count under this magic number. We heard anecdotally that one local firm told the business manager that if he allowed the hiring of a 50th employee, he would be fired to bring the number back under the limit.

Multiple-location restaurants are caught in the worst situation. Like smaller firms, they are locally owned and run. But unlike small firms, they are labor intensive and often exceed 50 FTEs. These businesses are required to comply with the Obamacare regulations for all of their full-time workers.

These regulations require either purchasing health care for each full-time employee or paying the $2,000 fine per each full-time employee over 30.

If firms don’t purchase health care, they are subject to the penalty. Even smaller companies with just 20 full-time employees or 50 FTE employees will owe a $40,000 annual fine. Larger businesses with 530 full-time employees will owe $1 million. Purchasing health care for employees is even more expensive because government regulations more than double the cost of health care on younger workers.

Because the penalty does not apply to part-time employees, economic self-defense has many firms forcing their employees to work less than 30 hours a week regardless of their preference or availability. This trend seems to be universal.

Even though the list includes almost all major franchises, most companies have been smart enough to keep the changes as quiet as possible. When employers have revealed these changes, the backlash and boycotts have been harsh and vitriolic from liberals. Their reaction lacks any sympathy for the economic burdens dumped on business owners.

Imagine a business that pays $10 an hour for each employee. Three workers working part time at 27 hours per week cost $810 per week plus the additional cost of training each of them. Two workers working full time at 40 hours per week cost $800, and their training costs are comparatively less.

Before Obamacare, businesses made the obvious choice of giving fewer people full-time employment to reduce the cost of training additional people. This was a win for everyone. The employee had the ease of working only one job, and the business had fewer training costs.

However, under Obamacare, if the business has more than 50 employees, there is a $2,000 fine on each full-time employee. Suddenly, two full-time workers cost an additional $4,000. Even if a 50-employee firm can change just 20 of its full-time workers into FTE employees, they can save $40,000 per year.

The $4,000 fine can be avoided by shifting the two full-time employees to part time and then hiring and training a third. These workers have to respond by finding a second part-time job at another establishment.

This is part of the reason why employment statistics show part-time employment is on the rise while the number of hours being worked remains constant. It also explains the economic benefits of outsourcing, sending jobs overseas, or using technology to replace workers. These alternatives to employment can save money by avoiding the Obamacare employer mandates even if they appear to cost more on paper.

The news media has mostly missed connecting the dots on this larger story. And critics question how companies can take these steps in good conscience. But businesses did not force such absurd laws on the country.

The government has invented a coercive method of compliance in the form of a corporate fine, and it is completely understandable that corporations are trying to find a plan within the legislation that benefits them and allows them to remain in business despite the massive tax increases this year on entrepreneurs.

Most liberal reactions to stories like this are to rant about high corporate profits. Or they suggest the legislation is really doing businesses a favor by trying to keep their employees healthy and happy. I wish they would spare helping any more with such employment advice. Only the government can create legislation designed to increase health-care coverage whose effect has been to reduce the likelihood that people will be covered.

Meanwhile, over the past three years, the harm to employment has caused countless families to foreclose on their homes, fail to achieve their economic goals, and patch together subsistence employment. ACA has made health insurance less universal and less affordable. So much for trying to meet the health-care needs of the people.

David John Marotta is president of Marotta Wealth Management, Inc., which provides fee-only financial planning and wealth management. Contact him at david@emarotta.com. Megan Russell studied cognitive science at the University of Virginia and now specializes in explaining the complexities of economics and finance at www.marottaonmoney.com

Are you ready for disaster? Not to be overly gloomy, but disaster planning should be high on your list of priorities followed closely by review and testing of the plan. Among the categories any disaster plan should address are personnel, records, and assets.

It comes as no surprise that one of the foremost concerns expressed by employers surveyed is for the individuals they employ. An organization should maintain a current employees list at all times and some manner by which to track attendance and location of employees. In an emergency situation, the first order of business is to account for all employees and ascertain their physical safety. Fire and emergency evacuation drills should be documented and practiced periodically. Some organizations deem it prudent to establish a safety room. Such space should be stocked with water and first-aid equipment.

Communication is critical in times of emergency, so employees should have a list of cell phone and home telephone numbers for all employees to access in the event of an emergency. Many organizations employ a communications tree.

In terms of safeguarding assets, it’s wise to maintain an up-to-date inventory of furniture, computers, and equipment including digital photos to facilitate and support updates to insurance policies. Business records carry their own set of challenges in terms of ensuring safety. While many organizations have moved to a paperless environment for archiving information, there is still a risk before data is converted to an electronic format.

By implementing procedures aimed at minimizing the length of time before information is electronically stored will greatly reduce exposure to loss. And who wants to call a client to explain how their original documents met their demise under your watch?

At the crux of any successful venture is an effective communications plan. Disaster recovery is no exception. Beyond the employee phone tree, a means of reaching out to clients as well as handling incoming calls is important. Rerouting calls to an individual’s phone or a call center are among the options available. Web communications can continue with limited interruption when adequate backup systems are employed. By having a communications plan in place an organization can greatly limit stress for employees and customers alike.

Business documents need to be accessible, which makes going paperless before disaster strikes a logical choice, and with the current cloud trend, numerous options are readily available. By electronically storing documents and information, your office can be up and running either virtually or in temporary quarters.

Employees will need to know they have access to compensation, and in the case of widespread disaster, there may be a need to provide emotional and physical support to affected families.

Once your most valued possessions and enterprise risks have been identified, it is time to turn to specific scenarios that might occur. Fire? Tornado? Flood? (Yes, even here in upstate New York — just ask our friends in the Mohawk Valley and Southern Tier.) Perhaps it is wise to consider what happens differently during work hours versus after-hours. In any event, it is important to have a documented plan that can be implemented quickly. The plan should prioritize what needs to be attended to and provide specific steps, activities, and desired outcomes.

A clearly defined checklist can help ensure that tasks are not overlooked. What should be considered? Contacting banks, courier services, insurance carriers, telephone-service providers all rank among the top priorities for recovery, but be sure that the most clearly communicated point to all employees is to call 911 and vacate premises immediately. For so many reasons, clear communication to all levels of employees and an expectation of compliance are key. Sounds simple, but this point is so important.

All of the logistics can seem overwhelming but, like so many things, provides its own reward for good planning. One of the most overlooked aspects of a disaster plan is proper insurance. Your CPA can provide assistance in determining values and guidance in maintaining inventories and operational documents. Don’t be content with the notion that trouble won’t bother your business. Be prepared.

Gail Kinsella is a partner in the accounting firm of Testone, Marshall & Discenza, LLP. Contact Kinsella at gkinsella@tmdcpas.com

When Detroit, once one of America’s largest cities and industrial engines, files for bankruptcy to resolve its fiscal woes, it gets people talking. And now, a brighter spotlight has been placed on the fiscal challenges facing local communities around the nation and here in New York.

Many are asking if Detroit’s fiscal situation and bankruptcy are a foreshadowing of what’s to come for other local governments as a number of factors continue to push them toward a financial cliff.

Municipal bankruptcies are rare around the nation. They have never happened in New York, and with good reason. Bankruptcy proceedings of municipalities in other states have left fiscal problems unresolved for years, while making it more difficult for local governments to deliver services.

But there are wider lessons to be learned from Detroit. One of the biggest takeaways is the importance of having an honest conversation about the difficult challenges facing local governments and how they can best achieve real solutions when their regional economies, demographics, and traditional revenue sources change.

Here in New York, the Great Recession and our slow national and state recovery have directly affected several sources of local revenue. For instance, sales-tax revenues have suffered major declines, state and federal aid haven’t kept pace with inflation, and property taxes — the most significant source of local revenue — have been capped by the state.

Additionally, government spending is outpacing government revenue. From 2006 through 2011, county expenditures jumped 17.2 percent, while revenues climbed 13.4 percent. Total city expenditures increased 8.4 percent, but revenues only increased 6.4 percent. And town expenditures grew 12.9 percent, as revenues merely increased 7.1 percent. By 2011, nearly 300 local governments had deficits and more than 100 had inadequate cash on hand to pay their bills.

Meanwhile, population and job losses in many communities outside of New York City have resulted in higher-than-average unemployment, rising poverty rates, and an increased demand for government services.

Combined, these factors are having a real and adverse effect on the day-to-day operations of local governments. So what are the solutions that can help?

Before you can attack a problem, you need to understand what you are facing. This is why my office has developed an early warning system to present a realistic account of local-government finances and help foster much-needed public discussions at the local level about fiscal stress so that corrective actions can be taken.

My Fiscal Stress Monitoring System uncovers specific counties, cities, towns, villages, and school districts that are in significant stress or approaching stress. The system — developed by experts who understand the complexity of local government finances — scores municipalities and school districts on various financial indicators.

Our system’s first set of scores identified two dozen communities from every region of the state facing some level of fiscal stress. This included eight counties, three cities, and 13 towns. This list was a wakeup call for many local officials and for taxpayers.

Now the attention must turn to solutions. Although there will be no one-size-fits-all approach to dealing with fiscal stress, there are initial steps that should be taken.

Given the tough choices facing local governments, elected leaders and their constituents must work together. Local officials should go the extra mile to inform their constituents and seek their input on budget decisions. Voters owe it to themselves to learn more about the financial decisions being made in their communities and help prioritize their community’s needs more effectively.

To help our partners at the local level become more efficient, more creative, more forward-thinking, and more effective with available resources, my office also created a new local government support program — ACT FAST — which stands for Avoid Crisis Tomorrow with Fiscal Awareness Strategies Today.

By request, we will provide accelerated risk assessments to determine the specific services that could be beneficial to individual communities. This approach will help us provide the best resources and advice to local governments so that they can make better budget decisions. These can include audits, budget reviews, and help with long-range financial planning.

I believe these types of preventive actions — ideally developed with active participation from citizens who will be affected — will result in less cost and less disruption to vital services.

Knowledge is power. By fostering a much-needed public discussion about fiscal stress, we can help communities across New York avoid following Detroit down a troubled financial path.

Thomas P. DiNapoli is the New York State Comptroller.