Obamacare rates may jump 17.3% in Michigan
The rate increases would mean a financial hit for taxpayers in general and the 345,000 Michiganders who buy their health insurance on the Healthcare.gov exchange, created under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
? Related:Quick facts on
"We really try our hardest to keep coverage affordable, but some of the costs are very difficult to manage when you have pharmacy companies going out with 800% increases on the price of their drugs in a year," said
Insurance companies in
? Related:
The reasons might be surprising for some: The proposals aren't judged on affordability but on a set of rules and actuarial equations. It might seem like cold math, but state regulators say certain basic financial conditions have to be met, such as determining whether a company can afford to competitively price its health plans and stay solvent.
"Quite honestly, I think we get more concerns from the actuaries about companies that may have some solvency issues and maybe their rates aren't high enough," Fossitt said.
The especially large rate increase proposals for 2017, however, will spark an extra close look, said
"Until this year,
Insurance companies say rate increases are not an attempt to profiteer, but a reflection of market realities, such as the high inflation of health care costs each year, especially for certain prescription drugs. Some insurers also say they've been losing money on plans sold on
The double-digit rate hike requests are also a reminder that the Affordable Care Act was primarily designed to extend health insurance coverage to more people -- not necessarily to contain the ever-rising costs of private coverage. Most people who buy insurance on the Healthcare.gov marketplace do not pay full sticker price because they qualify for the ACA's tax credit subsidies.
? Related:Cost of kids' dental plans could be part of ACA subsidies
Of the 14 insurers with individual market plans, 10 are seeking increases exceeding 10%. They include a proposed 13.9% average increase by
State regulators are also learning as they go. Even though the ACA dates to 2010, the marketplace didn't sell individual coverage until the 2013-2014 enrollment period, giving actuaries limited data.
Similarly large rate increases were common in the years before the law was passed by a Democrat-controlled
Among its more controversial provisions, the law mandated that people buy insurance or pay a penalty, banned bare-bones insurance plans, raised taxes on high-income households, among others. It also gave states the option of expanding
The ACA eliminated lifetime benefits limits, stopped insurers from rejecting people with pre-existing conditions and allowed children to stay on their parents' insurance policies until age 26.
Tax credits common, but some pay full freight
In
The tax credits are based on a percentage of an individual's income and family size and offered to those with incomes up to 400% of the federal poverty line (currently
Yet Michiganders such as
Lee, a retired mechanical engineer, noted how
He said he pays
"Frankly we can afford it, which is why we're not getting any subsidies," said Lee, whose wife qualifies for
More for Medigap
Those who buy individual market plans aren't the only
Insurance companies generally gave the same justifications to state regulators last month when they submitted their 2017 rate increase requests: unrelenting health care inflation; exploding prices for specialty drugs like for hepatitis C; higher-than-anticipated claims from the newly insured, and the expense of covering people who sign up for an individual plan and then drop it once they get a pricey procedure done.
The full ACA penalty this year for skipping insurance is
Another big factor is that 2017 marks the expiration of the health care law's temporary "reinsurance" program that distributes money to health plans whose members have very high medical claims.
"Every year medical costs go up, and the main driver we are seeing right now is specialty medication," she said. "The drug companies are increasing their prices even for drugs that have been in the market for a couple years, and we're seeing this for generic drugs as well."
There have been few reports of blatant profiteering by insurance companies in the individual market. It has been more common for insurance companies, such as UnitedHealthcare, the nation's largest health insurer, to pull out of the individual market citing higher-than-expected financial losses.
To guard against high profits, the ACA mandates that insurers spend at least 80% of their individual market premium dollars on actual claims and not on executive salaries or administrative overhead. Companies that break that "medical loss ratio" rule must issue customer rebates.
Insurers in
Nevertheless,
Getting it right
The rate review process in
The complex filings are then reviewed by seven outside actuarial firms that write up reports recommending approval or disapproval. The actuary reports are then reviewed by the department's internal analysts. They focus on whether the rates are properly justified and if the insurance companies can support the actuarial assumptions underlying them, he said.
"It really doesn't matter the magnitude of the rate increase," Dyke said. "We just want to be sure it's right -- that it produces a reasonable rate where the premiums are reasonable related to the benefits being offered."
"We like to think we wouldn't have any excessive rates after our review," he added later.
Baumgarten, the health care industry consultant, said state-level insurance regulators generally adopt one of two guiding philosophies in rate review: consumer advocacy or a fiscal focus in which "we protect the public by making sure the insurance companies stay solvent."
In most states, a rate increase request is "sort of the starting point for the negotiation" with regulators for determining the final, approved rate, Baumgarten said. Sometimes it results in a higher rate to guard against insurers going bankrupt.
Once the state finishes its review, the 2017 rates will be sent to federal regulators at the
Dyke said he was unaware of any instance in which federal regulators second-guessed
"If the state deems it to be a reasonable rate, it would be hard for CMS to say it's not reasonable," he said.
Contact JC Reindl: 313-222-6631 or [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter @JCReindl.
___
(c)2016 the Detroit Free Press
Visit the Detroit Free Press at www.freep.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.


Advisor News
- House panel advances CLEAR Forms Act backed by IRI
- Modifying life insurance based on evolving needs
- Gen X faces ‘pension envy’ as they head into retirement
- Your client wants to cash out an annuity. Here’s what to consider
- How student loan debt impacts 401(k) balances
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- A-Cap strikes back with lawsuit accusing SC regulators of sloppy process, leaking secrets
- AM Best to Discuss Its Views on Private Credit Surge and Risks at 2026 NAIC/NIPR Insurance Summit
- OID recovers $260M in life insurance benefits
- NUNN BILLS TO COMBAT PAYMENT SCAMS, CUT FINANCIAL RED TAPE PASS FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
- SS&C Black Diamond Expands Annuities & Insurance Marketplace with New Insurance Capabilities and Carriers
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News