Jeff Smedsrud's Health Insurance Development Watch List

Commentary January 05, 2023 at 02:27 AM
Share & Print

I've been setting up and running health insurance programs for decades. People often ask me to list the industry developments that interest me the most.

Here are six I'm watching now.

1. New CMS Marketing Regulations

Will new rules hurt those they intend to help?

The Biden administration is proposing new rules for Medicare Advantage intended to reduce confusion (and annoyance) for consumers who went to a lead-generation website to request information about Medicare plans.

Lead-generation websites are not affiliated with insurance carriers and ask consumers specific information about themselves when requesting quote information for one or more plans.

Sometimes those 'leads' are sold to marketers who might have licenses with multiple insurance companies, which can result in confusion for the consumer.

The new rules say that Medicare Advantage leads can only be provided to the carrier that offers the plan the consumer requests.

The problem is most consumers don't know what plan they want, and thousands of brokers every day help them make informed decisions that improve their coverage and often save them money. While the issue of consumer confusion has been most acute in the Medicare Advantage market with a plethora of celebrity TV commercials (think Joe Namath and Jimmy Walker).

Concern about misrepresentation in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) market is starting to bubble to the surface as well.

Sometimes regulations are needed to protect consumers, but often the federal government over-reaches and creates new problems instead of solutions.

Brokers and advisors should voice their opinion about their role in helping improve health care choices for millions of consumers seeking options.

2. Faith-Based Health Plans

Not regulated, but are they helpful or harmful?

About 1 million Americans are enrolled in health care sharing ministries, which are also known as faith-based health plans. The plans look like and act like individual health insurance.

However, they are not regulated at the state or federal level.

Faith-based plans can deny coverage and place restrictions on whether a claim is paid (if it is 'shared' with the faith body that subscribes to the service) or denied.

The monthly cost of these plans is usually less than that of Affordable Care Act plans, but those enrolled are not eligible for ACA tax subsidies.

Question: Will there be attempts to regulate these plans in 2023?

My view: Yes, there should be a discussion.

But I favor the disrupters. If you look at the history of fraternal insurance plans and other insurers that helped consumers challenge the norms of an established industry, progress is always on the side of those who create a bit of chaos.

Certainly, some faith-based plans should undergo scrutiny, but that is as it should be for all companies.

We learn from change.

3. Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Arrangements

Will this hard-to-pronounce solution for the individual health market finally become a relevant alternative, or will it continue to occupy only a tiny niche?

The individual coverage health reimbursement arrangement, or ICHRA, was created through regulations completed by the administration of former President Donald Trump. It has bipartisan support.

In an ICHRA, employers of any size can reimburse employees for some or all of the premiums that the employees pay for health insurance they purchase on their own.

Thus far, based on reports, there are more than 200,000 consumers enrolled in ICHRA arrangements. ICHRAs have penetrated less than 1% of the U.S. commercial health insurance market.

There are zealous proponents of this solution and equally strong opponents.

Pro tip: If a group — whether large or small — is being offered more than a 15% rate increase for their benefit plan, make an ICHRA plan one of the options you present.

4. Georgia on My Mind

Will proposed ACA reforms become law in a swing state?

In 2020 the Trump administration granted a waiver of the usual Affordable Care Act health insurance rules for Georgia residents, which could result in the availability of more alternatives and, possibly, lower costs for those who buy their own health insurance.

The approval was related to an executive order President Trump signed. The goal of the executive order was to minimize the economic burden imposed by the ACA and provide greater flexibility for the states.

The Biden administration has temporarily blocked the Georgia plan from going into effect, but the launch still might happen.

What takes place in Georgia has implications across the United States: How far can federal officials go to stop state-based reforms if they disagree with the approach?

It's an open question.

5. Brokers

Will brokers prevail over instant online solutions?

For years, many experts have predicted that brokers and advisors will soon be extinct, a relic of the pre-online, do-it-yourself enrollment platforms.

As online enrollment platforms have improved, fueled partly by artificial intelligence solutions, will brokers and advisors finally go the way of the dinosaur?

I don't think so. In fact, evidence supports a surge of consumers wanting to meet or speak with a qualified advisor.

Why?

My view: Perhaps COVID-19 helped consumers realize that doing it yourself isn't that easy, and perhaps there is finally recognition that buying health insurance (like other consumer products) isn't always rational.

It's emotional, as it should be because health choices are personal.

It's not predictive, as many hoped it would be.

6. Short-Term Medical Plans

Will they avoid new federal regulations?

It has been predicted for two-plus years that the administration of President Joe Biden would issue regulations to restrict the duration of short-term medical plans to three months, just as the administration of former President Barack Obama did in 2019.

Back then, several companies began to offer consumers the opportunity to buy back-to-back STM plans. Consumers embraced the idea.

The cold truth is that states are responsible for regulating STM plans.

If a state restricts insurance choice, that means advocates of choice and lower costs have failed to communicate effectively.

My advice: Continue to offer STM to your clients who need a temporary health insurance solution. Let them know that it will cost less than an ACA plan, and that the coverage has limitations.

Will the Biden administration actually move forward with what would be a controversial regulation to restrict consumer choice?

My best guess is no. At least, not in 2023.

What It All Means

Regulators should be careful about how they propose to restrict consumer choice.

The best thing for brokers, advisors, and industry peer groups to do is to advocate loudly for the importance of their roles.


Jeff SmedsrudJeff Smedsrud is was a co-founder of Healthcare.com and the founder of Pivot Health. He now serves as a consultant to carriers, marketers and brokers at Smedsrud Insurance Consultants.

..

..

..

(Image: Bram Janssens/Thinkstock)

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Related Stories

Resource Center