Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-19-2016, 07:03 PM   #141
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 662
Current list of states UHC will not have 2017 exchange participation:

Alabama
Arkansas
Colorado
Connecticut
Georgia (Harken Health subsidiary will continue)
Louisiana
Maryland
Michigan
Missouri
Nebraska
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Texas
Washington

Confirmation of 2017 participation: New York, Nevada, Virginia

Quote:
In North Carolina, a quarter of consumers will see the number of available exchange insurers drop to one for next year, according to an analysis from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Reference: UnitedHealth to Exit Obamacare in 16 States to Stem Losses - Bloomberg
__________________

__________________
MBSC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 04-20-2016, 12:59 PM   #142
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,465
Here's an excellent analysis by KFF of how this move by UHC will impact some healthcare marketplaces. Summary article here, detailed analysis here.

Quote:
Without UnitedHealth’s participation in 2016, monthly benchmark premiums for the second lowest cost silver plan for a 40 year-old would have been $25 to $100 higher in 304 of 3,142 counties in the U.S. and more than $100 higher in 13 counties. A UnitedHealth exit would likely affect premiums most in Alabama, Arizona, Iowa, Nebraska and North Carolina, the analysis finds.
While UHC was not a major competitor in most areas it frequently offered one of the policies upon which the subsidy is calculated (second lowest cost silver).
__________________

__________________
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2016, 02:35 PM   #143
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Miami
Posts: 156
[QUOTE=MBSC;1720854]Current list of states UHC will not have 2017 exchange participation:

Alabama
Arkansas
Colorado
Connecticut
Georgia (Harken Health subsidiary will continue)
Louisiana
Maryland
Michigan
Missouri
Nebraska
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Texas
Washington

Confirmation of 2017 participation: New York, Nevada, Virginia

Anything on Florida?
__________________
FIRE July 2015 - The US government spends nearly the ENTIRETY of its tax revenue on Social Security, Medicare, and Interest on the Debt
Blueskies123 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2016, 04:07 PM   #144
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueskies123 View Post
Anything on Florida?
This article says Florida, Arizona, Kansas, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and South Carolina were added today to the list of states UHC will not participate in.

Aetna will re-enter a few markets but has not specifed which ones.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...to-stem-losses
__________________
MBSC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Medicare?
Old 04-26-2016, 07:38 PM   #145
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Elberta, AL
Posts: 146
Medicare?

Will UHC still have Medicare policies next year? I have been looking for this answer in this thread. The reason I am asking is I was planning on getting a UHC plan when I join Medicare in September. I don't want to get a plan that will be dropped.
__________________
reubenray is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-26-2016, 08:41 PM   #146
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,143
My Humana Medicare plan was severely limited in participating doctors this year. As you might guess, they didn't go out of their way to let the participants know.

I think UHC's approach to ACH might be a better approach than Humana's for Medicare.
__________________
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-26-2016, 08:59 PM   #147
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 170
So Medicare plans are following the ACA plans and severely shrinking their networks of doctors, clinics, labs, and hospitals? I know my employer-provided insurance has been deteriorating and shrinking since 2007, before Obama and ACA came along.
__________________
Dreaming of Freedom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-26-2016, 11:11 PM   #148
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
While UHC was not a major competitor in most areas it frequently offered one of the policies upon which the subsidy is calculated (second lowest cost silver).
Which isn't a big deal if you're getting a subsidy, right? If the price of the SLCSP goes up then your subsidy increases in lock step.

I'm on UHC's silver plan in NC (as is my MIL) and we'll be losing that coverage in 2017 it seems. Down to Aetna and BCBS (though the latter has grumbled about pulling out). Both seem like reasonable choices, and if I'm paying the same premium based on % of income I suppose I'm indifferent if the policy costs $1100/mo or $5000/mo (assuming price goes up with less competition).
__________________
Retired in 2013 at age 33. Keeping busy reading, blogging, relaxing, gaming, and enjoying the outdoors with my wife and 3 kids (5, 11, and 12).
FUEGO is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-26-2016, 11:27 PM   #149
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,423
UHC leaving ACA may not make a big difference:

Quote:
While it would appear that United Health's exit would radically change the game for the ACA exchanges, the impact may not be that significant.

For one thing, United Health never really entered these marketplaces head first. In fact, as of March 31, the company insures only 750,000 of the more than 12 million people enrolled in Obamacare.

In fact, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, which focuses on healthcare policy, the impact on enrollees' premiums and competition would not be substantial.

"The effect of a United withdrawal nationally would be modest," said a study by Cynthia Cox and Ashley Semanskee of Kaiser. "The national weighted average benchmark silver plan would have been roughly 1% higher in 2016 had United not participated (less than $4 per month for an unsubsidized 40-year-old)."

Cox and Semanskee found that United offered mostly high-cost plans in just 34 states in the US as of 2016, so by removing itself from the exchanges the impact would not be as significant as you may think in terms of increased cost or limited choice.

In terms of competition, if United does remove itself from all exchanges Cox and Semanskee found that 53% of all counties covered by exchanges would have only one or two exchanges. While this is significant, most counties with limited options are more rural and less populated. Therefore, the total number of people with limited choice is still relatively low.

Here's Cox and Semanskee (emphasis added):

If United exits everywhere (again, with the exception of Harken Health in Georgia), the number of Marketplace enrollees with access to only one or two exchange insurers would increase (from 1.9 million to 3.8 million or from 15% to 30% of all enrollees), and the number of enrollees with only one insurer would also increase (from 303 thousand to 1.4 million or from 2% to 11% of all enrollees). Still, the vast majority of Marketplace enrollees (8.9 million or 70% of enrollees nationally) would continue to have a choice of three or more insurers, even in the absence of United.

8862 figure 22
Kaiser Family Foundation

This isn't to say that there won't be an impact on some people trying to gain health insurance through exchanges. As the researchers note, the move will disproportionately impact those in rural areas in some Southern states. But, in aggregate, the removal of United from Obamacare isn't a massive shift for costs or competition.

"On average nationally, based on our analysis of 2016 insurer premiums, United’s participation on the exchanges had a relatively small effect on premiums," concluded the study.

"As a result, the weighted average benchmark premium would have been roughly 1% higher had United not participated in 2016 (not accounting for the possible effect changes in insurer participation may have had on pricing behavior or the potential for new entrants to the market)."

Now, as Cox and Semanskee note, the long-run effects of this move are a bit more uncertain. Insurers in communities with less competition could begin raising prices, but there are some provisions in the ACA that would prevent tha

Impact of United Health leaving Obamacare - Business Insider
__________________
explanade is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-27-2016, 05:43 AM   #150
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by FUEGO View Post
Which isn't a big deal if you're getting a subsidy, right?
Maintaining competition between insurance companies is a big deal if we want to keep costs down and if we care about the total federal budget impact of those subsidies.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-27-2016, 05:44 AM   #151
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by reubenray View Post
Will UHC still have Medicare policies next year? I have been looking for this answer in this thread. The reason I am asking is I was planning on getting a UHC plan when I join Medicare in September. I don't want to get a plan that will be dropped.
The UHC announcements are limited to individual ACA policies for people less than age 65. There have been no announcements by UHC (or anyone else) about Medicare policies. Doubtful they would stop selling Medicare policies, they are much more important sources of revenue and profit.
__________________
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-27-2016, 06:19 AM   #152
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by reubenray View Post
Will UHC still have Medicare policies next year?
Yes, this line of business is profitable. UHC's actions mostly impact their on-exchange plans. In a few states, they are also exiting the off-exchange individual under age 65 market and small group market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreaming of Freedom View Post
So Medicare plans are following the ACA plans and severely shrinking their networks of doctors, clinics, labs, and hospitals?
Medicare supplements (Medigap) do not have a network per se. If the provider accepts Original Medicare and is accepting new Medicare patients, you are good. Medicare Advantage uses PPO and HMO networks. On average, these networks are getting smaller but it depends on the insurer and state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FUEGO View Post
Which isn't a big deal if you're getting a subsidy, right? If the price of the SLCSP goes up then your subsidy increases in lock step.
Right, and some younger people would qualify for a subsidy as explained in the article below.

ACA insurance marketplaces: Evaluating market growth - Milliman Insight

Quote:
2. Premium increases and market bifurcation. The ACA permits individuals with annual household incomes between 100% FPL and 400% FPL, who do not qualify for other forms of minimum essential coverage, to receive premium assistance through the insurance marketplace. This is conditioned on the premium of the subsidy benchmark plan costing more than a certain percentage of an individual’s household income. To the extent the subsidy benchmark plan costs less than the maximum amount the individual must pay under the ACA, the value of premium assistance is $0. This results in the value of premium assistance reaching $0 well below 400% FPL for younger individuals in many states.

As Figure 2 indicates, in many states experiencing large premium increases, the population qualifying for premium assistance was expanded to higher income levels.

Premium increases over time may result in a much greater proportion of younger adults becoming eligible for premium assistance in the marketplace.
__________________
MBSC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-06-2016, 02:47 PM   #153
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ivinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by FUEGO View Post
Which isn't a big deal if you're getting a subsidy, right? If the price of the SLCSP goes up then your subsidy increases in lock step.

I'm on UHC's silver plan in NC (as is my MIL) and we'll be losing that coverage in 2017 it seems. Down to Aetna and BCBS (though the latter has grumbled about pulling out). Both seem like reasonable choices, and if I'm paying the same premium based on % of income I suppose I'm indifferent if the policy costs $1100/mo or $5000/mo (assuming price goes up with less competition).
This is a true statement, but in reality ever escalating health care costs will eventually have a negative effect on everyone in the entire country. It's scary to think about where things might be with healthcare in even another 5 years.My DH is on Medicare and I am 30 months away from it..( and I am counting the months....but that doesn't erase my concern about this problem.
__________________
ivinsfan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-07-2016, 11:15 AM   #154
Full time employment: Posting here.
GTFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 636
Agreed, especially when you consider that with our current political impasse it may take a major collapse of the market (if then) to get further reforms.
__________________
GTFan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-08-2016, 06:22 PM   #155
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,143
Unfortunately, I think the number of companies leaving the ACA indicates the government has not figured out how to pay for it yet or make it work profitably for private companies. It will be hard to do with continually escalating medical costs.
__________________
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-08-2016, 06:45 PM   #156
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermit View Post
....... It will be hard to do with continually escalating medical costs.
Yes, the elephant in the room. Costs cannot continue to rise at this rate forever.
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-09-2016, 06:23 AM   #157
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermit View Post
Unfortunately, I think the number of companies leaving the ACA indicates the government has not figured out how to pay for it yet or make it work profitably for private companies.
The actuaries employed by the insurance companies set the premiums which drives profit/loss. I agree it could be marketed better.

Quote:
In the small universe that is health insurance, 2017 may turn out to be pretty nice for the men and women who predict how much insurers have to pay out in claims.

After three years actuaries finally have the information to more accurately forecast what they need to make a profit.
Reference: Health insurance spikes in 2017 may mean more competition
__________________
MBSC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-09-2016, 08:16 AM   #158
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermit View Post
Unfortunately, I think the number of companies leaving the ACA indicates the government has not figured out how to pay for it yet or make it work profitably for private companies. It will be hard to do with continually escalating medical costs.
So far, only one large / national insurer has announced it will no longer offer individual policies, which is UHC and the subject of this thread. The only other major announcement was some of the BCBS state operations announcing a year ago they would no longer offer PPO plans in Texas and a few other markets. BCBS across the country continues to be the largest insurer in the individual marketplace.

The other large insurers - Aetna, Cigna, Humana, have announced they continue with their expansion plans.
__________________
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-09-2016, 02:24 PM   #159
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreaming of Freedom View Post
So Medicare plans are following the ACA plans and severely shrinking their networks of doctors, clinics, labs, and hospitals? I know my employer-provided insurance has been deteriorating and shrinking since 2007, before Obama and ACA came along.
To my understanding, this is the fundamental mistake UHC made with their plans. The exchange customers are extremely price sensitive, for the most part. Most healthy consumers aren't focusing on the network. They are focusing on the price.

The people who are focusing on the networks are the people who have existing relationships with providers that they need to maintain (read - sick people). So an insurer who builds a wide network that includes all of the region's expensive specialty doctors is setting themselves up for adverse selection.

The insurers that are building the cheapest, narrowest network allowed by the ACA are the ones that are going to do well financially. UHC built a wide network and got a disproportionate number of sick people signing up for their plans.

I'm confused about how such a big player could make such a simple misstep, but there you go.
__________________
Hamlet is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-09-2016, 09:32 PM   #160
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
So far, only one large / national insurer has announced it will no longer offer individual policies, which is UHC and the subject of this thread. The only other major announcement was some of the BCBS state operations announcing a year ago they would no longer offer PPO plans in Texas and a few other markets. BCBS across the country continues to be the largest insurer in the individual marketplace.

The other large insurers - Aetna, Cigna, Humana, have announced they continue with their expansion plans.
There is another active thread listing states where Humana is leaving?
__________________

__________________
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ACA Exchange Dental Plans for 2015 FUEGO Health and Early Retirement 6 11-15-2014 09:53 PM
Stop Stop Scrounging for Income and Sell Some Stocks clifp FIRE and Money 88 12-27-2013 08:17 AM
United Healthcare Stops Offering Insurance to Children dgoldenz FIRE Related Public Policy 30 05-06-2010 09:50 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:38 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.