Many Employees Choosing the Wrong Health Plans

June 17, 2022

A new study has found that many people in employer-sponsored health plans are enrolling in plans that are costing them more than they ought to be paying.

Many employees choose pricey plans with low deductibles, which force them to spend more up front on premiums to save just a few hundred dollars on their deductible.

As result, many employees are spending hundreds, if not thousands of dollars more on their health care/health coverage than they need to.

Study 1: The deductible angle

A study by Benjamin Handel, a U.C. Berkeley economics professor, found that the majority of employees at one company he studied were in the highest-premium, lowest-deductible plan ($250 a year) their employer offered.

This resulted in them spending about $4,500 a year on health care, compared to only $2,032 had they gone with the cheaper plan (which had a $500 annual deductible) and received exactly the same care.

Study 2: Too many choices?

Additionally, the research paper “Choose to Lose: Health Plan Choices from a Menu with Dominated Options,” published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, found that more choices also didn’t yield more savings for individuals in employer-sponsored plans.

The study examined the health plan choices that 23,894 employees at one large U.S. employer made. They were able to choose from 48 different combinations of deductibles, pharmaceutical copayments, co-insurance and maximum out-of-pocket expenses. All of the plans offered the same network of doctors and hospitals.

As a result, workers paid an extra $528 in premiums for the year to keep their deductible at $750 instead of $1,000. In other words, they paid $528 to save $250.

For nearly every plan with a deductible of $1,000 (the highest deductible available for those seeking single coverage), the additional premiums required to reduce the deductible, with all other plan attributes fixed, exceeded the maximum possible out-of-pocket savings provided by the lower deductible.

The study also found that the lowest-paid workers were significantly more likely to choose dominated plans (the most expensive).

Both of the studies above looked at plan options with relatively low deductibles when compared with high-deductible health plans, which have become more popular with time.

In 2018, the minimum deductible for an HDHP is $1,350 for an individual and $2,700 for a family. But, under current regulations, total out-of-pocket expenses are limited to $6,650 for an individual and $13,300 for a family with a HDHP.

While these plans have gotten a bad rap lately, a study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found they are often cheaper for employees, as well.

The authors, both from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, found in a study of 331 companies, that at firms offering both a HDHP and a low-deductible plan, selecting the HDHP typically saves more than $500 a year.

Strategies

To help offset the cost of a HDHP, you can offer your staff health savings accounts (HSAs), which offer a tax-advantaged way to save for health care costs. While there are annual contribution limits, HSAs allow your employees to roll over their balance from year to year. The funds they contribute to their HSA are pre-tax, so the savings are significant.

The Wisconsin-Madison authors surmised that many people choose the costlier health plan for two reasons:

Inertia – It’s easier for consumers to stick with their old plan rather than crunch the numbers to see if a new plan may be more appropriate.
Deductible aversion – When employees see a low-deductible plan they may associate it with better quality care, even though the network and coverage may be the same.

The best strategy to guide your staff to the plan that best suits them is to educate them. You should have workshops for your staff prior to open enrollment, to help them understand why the higher-deductible plan may often be the best choice for them if they want to save money on their overall premium and out-of-pocket expenses.

Ideally, you could encourage them to set aside the same amount of money in their HSA that would be enough to cover their deductible. This way, your employees would not feel burdened by health expenses they may have to pay for during the year.

Uncategorized

Health Plans Dropping Out-of-Pocket Cost Waivers for COVID-19 Treatment

by Inoventive Solutions

May 4, 2021

As the light at the end of the pandemic tunnel gets brighter, more health insurers are ceasing to offer cost-sharing waivers for COVID-19 treatment.

After legislation was enacted in 2020 that required health insurance companies to cover COVID-19 tests and vaccines, many insurers voluntarily waived all deductibles, copayments and other costs for insured patients who fell ill with COVID-19 and needed hospital care, doctor visits, medications or other treatment.

Not all health insurers extended these waivers to their enrollees, but many did.

Insurers are still required to provide free COVID-19 testing and vaccinations to their enrollees. That’s because federal guidance requires them to waive such costs.

Also, guidance issued in February after President Joe Biden assumed office, reinforced the Trump administration rule about waiving cost-sharing for testing. Biden’s guidance took an extra step, saying that it applies even in situations in which an asymptomatic person wants a test before traveling or seeing a relative.

Almost 90% of individual and group health plans enrollees were in plans that waived cost-sharing for COVID-19 treatment, according to the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker.

What insurers are now doing

However, starting in late 2020, more and more insurers have quietly been dropping those waivers. For example:

UnitedHealthcare started curtailing its waivers in November.
Anthem stopped its cost-sharing waivers on Jan. 31.
Cigna stopped offering cost-sharing waivers for COVID-19 treatment on Feb. 15.
Aetna ceased offering deductible-free inpatient COVID-19 treatment waivers on Feb. 28.

Not all insurers are doing this though. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota extended eligibility for telehealth benefits and COVID-19 treatment waivers through the end of 2021. Humana, meanwhile, has left the cost-sharing waiver in place for Medicare Advantage members, but dropped it on Jan. 1 for those in job-based group plans.

A study by the Peterson Center on Healthcare and the Kaiser Family Foundation released in November 2020, found that 88% of Americans who have health coverage — including employer-sponsored health plans and individual plans purchased on exchanges — had policies that waived cost-sharing for COVID-19 treatment.

Despite the fact that vaccines are rolling out quickly across the country and in light of a significant percentage of people who are hesitant to get vaccinated for COVID-19, the coronavirus is expected to be a presence in society for some time to come. And that means people will contract it and get sick.

There are also concerns about mutant strains that have developed in South Africa and Brazil, and possibly in India during the massive outbreak in April.

The takeaway

You may want to check with your group health plans to see if they have waived any cost-sharing for COVID treatment, and have since dropped or are planning to drop it.

You should meet with your employees or send them a memo explaining any impending changes for them if they have a health plan that is ending or has ended waivers.

Uncategorized

IRS Allows Mid-Year Changes to Health Plans, FSAs

by Inoventive Solutions

June 9, 2020

The IRS has loosened restrictions on employees who want to make changes to their group health plans and flexible spending accounts (FSAs) in the middle of the policy year.

IRS rules are typically stringent and rigid, barring changes from being made to health plans except during open enrollment. Under the new rules, the employer would still have to approve letting staff make changes to their plans if they have more than one option to choose from.

The IRS issued the new guidance after employer groups lobbied the agency and Congress to loosen the rules because the COVID-19 pandemic has led to profound changes in employees’ health care needs as well as access to childcare.

The new rules are temporary and apply only to 2020. All of the following mid-year changes must be approved by the employer;

Health plan changes: Employers can let employees make mid-year changes that would be in effect for the remainder of the year. The new guidance allows employees to:

Drop out of their health insurance if they have another option,
Sign up for insurance if they have not done so,
Add family members to their plan, or
Switch to a different health insurance plan.

Allowing these changes could be beneficial to employees who have had their salaries cut, or were furloughed, but were able to retain their health coverage. Someone in this position, for example, may decide to switch to a lower-cost health plan if they are unable to afford the premiums on their current plan.

Flexible spending accounts: Employees must decide before the plan year starts how much to set aside every paycheck into their FSA, the funds of which can be used to pay for health care-related expenses. Under the new guidance, they are allowed to make changes to their contribution levels mid-year.

Employees that expect more medical expenses and are able to afford it, can elect to increase their FSA funding. But those who may have been setting aside funds for an elective surgery that they may want to postpone, can chose to decrease the amount they put into their FSA every month.

Carryover amount: Regulations governing FSAs require employees to use all of the funds in their FSA in a given year or lose it. There are two exceptions: Employers can give employees a two-and-a-half-month grace period after the end of the plan year to spend remaining funds that are in the account at the end of the year, or they can let workers carry over up to $500 from one year to the next.

Starting this year, the carryover limit will be set at 20% of the maximum health care FSA contribution limit, which is indexed to inflation. That means that for 2020, employers can let employees carry over up to $550 into 2021.

The takeaway

While allowing your employees to make changes can help them better budget their health care spending, making the change will result in extra administrative expenses for you. Changing plans mid-year, signing up employees for new plans and adding dependents can involve a significant amount of paperwork and documentation.

That said, allowing employees to make these changes mid-year could help them better budget their health care spending and give them some extra peace of mind.

Uncategorized

COVID-19 Changes to Health Plans Must Be Documented, Circulated

by Inoventive Solutions

May 6, 2020

A number of plan sponsors have made changes to their group health plans in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as covering testing and sometimes treatment without any cost-sharing by the plan enrollee.

But any changes that are made must be followed up by amending the plan and communicating the changes to the enrollees.

Under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, all health plans are required to deliver a Summary Plan Description (SPD) to enrollees to inform them of the full spectrum of coverage and their rights under the plan.

Whenever a plan sponsor makes a material modification to the terms of the plan or the information required to be in an SPD, they must amend the plan and let participants know about the change through a Summary of Material Modification (SMM).

Material changes

To qualify as “material,” a change must be important to plan enrollees. Examples include adding or eliminating a benefit, changing insurance companies, or changing rules for dependent eligibility.

Plan changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic that would have to be included in the SMM and SPD could include:

Offering continuing coverage to staff who would otherwise lose coverage due to a furlough, layoff or reduction of hours.
Changing eligibility terms to allow workers who may not have been eligible for coverage before to secure coverage (this could include part-time workers).
Covering a larger portion of an employee’s premium share.
Adding an employee assistance program to provide counseling for workers who may be undergoing unusual stress.
Adding telemedicine coverage.
Using funds in health savings accounts (HSAs) and flexible spending accounts (FSAs) to purchase over-the-counter medications.
Covering COVID-19 testing with no cost-sharing.
Covering COVID-19 treatment without cost-sharing.

Some of the above changes are required by new laws and health plans must respond accordingly by changing their SMMs and SPDs. For example, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act requires that group health insurance and individual health insurance plans cover coronavirus testing with zero cost-sharing.

And the Coronavirus Aid, Recover and Economic Stabilization Act reverses an Affordable Care Act rule that barred policyholders from using funds in HSAs and FSAs to pay for over-the-counter medications.

When the plan sponsor adopts these changes, it must also amend its plan summaries.

And SMMs must be delivered to plan participants within 60 days after a change has been adopted. You can deliver the SMM by mail, e-mail or posting it on your company’s intranet site. It’s recommended at this time that you opt for e-mail delivery.

One of the issues that may come up with any changes implemented in response to the COVID-19 outbreak is that some of the changes may be temporary.

If that’s the case, the plan needs to include the termination date of any benefits that are adopted on a temporary basis.

However, if you don’t know how long the temporary benefits will be in effect, their temporary nature must be communicated in the SMM. Employers need to issue another SMM when the temporary benefit or coverage term ends.

The takeaway

This is an unusual time and unusual times call for unusual measures. It’s unusual for changes to be made to a plan in the middle of a plan year but because of the way the pandemic crash-landed, many plan sponsors have had to make changes.

That said, you should work with us and your carrier on ensuring that the amended documents are sent out to staff.

As the employer, you should be aware of all the changes that have been made in response to COVID-19 so you can discuss them with any employees that have concerns or questions.

Healthcare

Substance-Abuse Benefits under Affordable Care Act

by Inoventive Solutions

March 17, 2020

One less-touted aspect of the Affordable Care Act is that it provides employers more tools for assisting employees with substance-abuse problems to seek help.

According to a study by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 10% of America’s workers are dependent on one substance or another. The study also found that 3.1% have used illegal drugs either before or during a shift.

Also, 79% of heavy alcohol users have jobs, and 7% of them say they’ve had drinks while on duty.

Drug use and abuse have been on the rise — both illegal drugs and prescription painkiller abuse, the latter of which led a more than a 500% increase in people seeking treatment for addiction to doctor-prescribed opioids between 2007 and 2017.

As an employer, the costs are great if you have someone on staff who has a substance-abuse problem. It behooves you to ensure that the group health plan you offer your workers is comprehensive amid this growing problem.

Far-reaching costs

Addicted workers have been found to have:

Lower or lack of workplace productivity;
Higher health care costs;
Increased absenteeism and presenteeism;
Diminished quality control;
More disability claims;
Increased workplace injuries;
Lower morale;
Higher job turnover; and
Employee theft.

Some employers have tried to help employees tackle their addictions or abuse problems by implementing workplace prevention, wellness and disease-management strategies. These programs improve health, which lowers health care costs and insurance premiums and produces a healthier, more productive workforce.

Under the ACA, anybody covered by a health plan has access to substance-abuse treatment. That’s because the law makes such treatment one of 10 benefits insurance plans must offer.

The ACA requires health plans to pay for prevention and early intervention.

Health care plans also have to comply with a “parity” law, which requires them to treat mental health issues the same way they do physical diseases.

What else can you do?

You can start by adding addiction to your prevention, intervention, treatment and disease-management strategies.
Use confidential screenings and assessments. There are a number of screening, brief-intervention and referral-to-treatment modules available to help people confront their drinking or drug use and get the help they need.
Review your policy for coverage. If you have coverage for substance-abuse treatment, employees with addictions will be more apt to seek out help knowing the cost is at least partially covered.

And, importantly, make sure your substance-abuse benefit is robust, and that it covers a full continuum of care.

A strong benefit would include:

Inpatient care;
Residential treatment programs;
Outpatient care; and
Continuing care for those in need of treatment.

Healthcare

Concerns Rise Over Letting Employers Fund HRAs for Individual Health Plans

by Inoventive Solutions

March 10, 2020

Employers, health insurers, regulators and hospitals are all raising concerns about the Trump administration’s rules issued last year that allow employers to fund health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) that their workers can use to purchase health plans on the open market.

The Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, IRS and the Department of Labor issued the final rules in late 2019. They reverse one of the major pinch-points of the Affordable Care Act, which bars employers from paying employees to buy their own health insurance either on publicly run health insurance exchanges or on the open market.

The fine for breaching this part of the law is a hefty $36,500 annually.

The rules continue to receive pushback from small business groups, insurers, regulators and others, who say that employers who want to go this route are facing a bureaucratic nightmare.

And one of the biggest concerns is that employers will use the opportunity to move older and sicker workers from their group health plans to exchanges, in order to reduce the cost burden on their plans.

Complexity a major issue

The National Federation of Independent Business has said that small businesses that want to offer workers an HRA integrated with an individual-market health plan are facing a lot of complexity.

“NFIB recommends that your departments plan to release… a publication that explains in plain English, step-by-step, how small businesses can establish, administer, and comply with the rules,” the group wrote.

HRAs are tax-sheltered accounts funded employers that typically are offered to reimburse employees for out-of-pocket medical expenses. This rule expands how those HRAs can be used. HRAs have been tax-advantaged only if they are coupled with an ACA-compliant group health plan. They cannot be used now to pay premiums for individual-market health insurance.

Under the rule, employers could provide an HRA that is integrated with individual health insurance coverage. The rule does include provisions to prevent employers from steering workers or dependents with costly health conditions away from the employer group plan and toward individual coverage.

Employers also could offer a different type of HRA, funded up to $1,800 a year, that could be used by employees to pay premiums for short-term plans that don’t comply with ACA consumer protections.

Employers could not offer the same employees the choice of either a traditional group plan or an HRA-funded individual-market plan. But they could offer a group plan to certain classes of employees, such as full-time workers under age 25, and an HRA plan to other classes, such as part-time employees.

Fears many may be shunted from group plans

Other concerns that are being raised include those by the American Academy of Actuaries that self-insured employers, in particular, may use the rule to shunt less healthy employees out of their group health plans, which in turn could result in worsening the ACA individual-market risk pool.

The Federation of American Hospitals expressed concern that the proposal would shift people out of the employer group market into the less stable individual market, which offers thinner benefits and less support for consumers.

The conservative National Federation of Independent Business supports the new rule but is concerned that it will be a complex process to set this type of arrangement up, especially for small businesses.

The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said the proposal to let a special type of HRA be used to buy short-term plans could be challenged legally, because the ACA and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) prohibit group plans from discriminating based on health status, as short-term plans are allowed to do.

Events

Happy Holidays from Inoventive!

by Marcy Heath

December 24, 2019

Happy Holidays. Wishing you every happiness this holiday season and throughout the coming year!

Finance, Healthcare

How to Get the Benefits of Self-Funding without the Risks

by Inoventive

November 12, 2019

There are typically two approaches to securing health coverage for your staff – group health insurance or self-funding.

Self-funding, however, can be costly and risky and is usually only done by larger organizations with thousands of employees. But there is a hybrid model that can help small and mid-sized employers provide their staff with affordable health coverage: partial self-insuring.

Healthcare

Short-term Health Plans Skimp on Medical Payments

by Inoventive

October 15, 2019

A new report by the trade publication Modern Healthcare shows just how little short-term care plans spend on enrollees’ medical claims.

The report found that some plans spent as little as 9 cents of every premium dollar they collected on medical care.

The average paid out among the short-term plans analyzed in a report by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners was 39.2%. That’s a far cry from the 80% of premiums health plans are required to spend on medical care to comply with the Affordable Care Act.

Finance, Healthcare

Small Employers Can Reimburse for Medicare Part B, D Premiums

by Inoventive

September 17, 2019

As the workforce ages and many employers want to keep on baby-boomer staff who have the experience and institutional knowledge that is irreplaceable, one issue that always comes up is how to handle health insurance.

Once your older workers reach the age of eligibility for Medicare, under current law you can help them pay for Part B and D premiums with a Medicare Premium Reimbursement Arrangement. These types of arrangements became legal after legislation was signed into law in 2013 to help employers provide benefits to their Medicare-eligible staff.

Many Employees Choosing the Wrong Health Plans