Healthcare insurance and retirement - again!

Status
Not open for further replies.
But to have no medical underwriting without an individual mandate wouldn't the rates have to be so high to make the insurance unavoidable once people start to game the system?

Sent from my LGLS751 using Early Retirement Forum mobile app

No. As long as there are restrictions on when you can get on (like annually during a certain month or in the event of certain life changes) like there are now you can't game the system. The existing rules could be retained to avoid such gaming.

There is a bit of gaming available today in that people can evaluate whether the premium cost tradeoff of bronze or silver or gold will be best.
 
The difference is that pre-ACA you were only paying for you. After ACA, you were paying for quite a few more people.

Assuming that anytime the ACA could be cut, or asset tested like Medicaid, this is just another risk of ER. No different that any other risk.

I think there are many people that FIRE'd early, perhaps without being prepared?

The risk now though is not being able to get insurance at any even halfway reasonable price, at least in the U.S. if the pre-existing clause gets reinstated or the premiums go to $4K a month or more. There were some plans in DHs retiree open enrollment book this year that actually had that amount just for premiums alone.

Pre-ACA I knew a lot of loopholes to get around the pre-existing clause (K1 partnership, 5 states without the clause, HIPAA continuous coverage, etc.) but post ACA I am not so sure what will happen if all the laws surrounding health insurance are rewritten.
 
Last edited:
No. As long as there are restrictions on when you can get on (like annually during a certain month or in the event of certain life changes) like there are now you can't game the system. The existing rules could be retained to avoid such gaming.

If there are no price caps then insurers can just make all policies prohibitively expensive for people over a certain age, like 55+.
 
I don't see anything significant happening quickly. Any changes will require either near-unanimous support from the majority party, or bi-partisan support. "Just repeal" won't fly, and "Repeal and replace" will take a lot of effort to come up with a suitable replacement. The "replacement" may end up looking more like an improved version of what we currently have in place.

I don't think they'd be using "repeal" if they want to come up with something better.

They're philosophically opposed to having the govt. involved in providing health care. So extending Medicare is also highly unlikely.
 
For early retirees, there are three main benefits of ACA--guaranteed issue, tax subsidy, and lower premiums for older customers than would be available in a market with underwriting.

As we transition to a post-ACA world, these benefits will change, worst case being we simply go back to the individual market that existed before ACA. I would be curious to hear from long time early retirees who actually shopped for and bought pre-ACA insurance, what that experience was like. I'm sure it varied a lot by state, age and how healthy you were.

I ERed at the end of October, 2008. I had been on COBRA since July of 2007 after I reduced my weekly hours worked from 20 to 12 and made myself ineligible for the company's group health plan. I offered to pay 100% of the premiums to remain in their plan but they balked. I asked them to extend COBRA beyond 18 months and they again balked.

As my ER plan began to take shape in 2008, I knew I would be leaving by the end of the year. I had lined up an individual HI plan (in New York, my home state) using ehealthinsurance.com and would pay $469 per month starting in 2009. The next lowest plan cost hundreds of dollars more per month and there was one other plan, a hospital-only plan, which cost under $200 per month.

In late 2009, I was told my premiums would rise 20% for 2010, to $562. I wasn't pleased but paid the higher premium. In 2010, however, the ACA was signed into law with the exchanges going on line in late 2013 for a 1/1/2014 start date. I was quite please. All I had to do was make it to 1/1/2014 intact and I'd see a lower premium with possible ACA subsidy.

In late 2010, I was told my premiums would rise another 25%, to just over $700 per month! That rate increase was rolled back a little bit so the premium would be about $692 per month. I was floored. I had not built into my budget such huge increases. I calculated that a 20% increase every year would have me paying over $2,000 a month in just 6 years! I checked ehealthinsurance again to see if there were any other low-cost plans but there were none. Other individual HI plans cost over $1,000 per month already. New York was surely a hostile state to try to buy individual HI through.

I then switched to that hospital-only health insurance plan. It left me greatly underinsured but I hoped I could hang in there for about 2 1/2 more years until 2014 began. The premium rose to slightly over $200 by the time we got to 2013 but I remained healthy.

At the end of 2013, I enrolled through the New York exchange with a plan from Empire BCBS. The premium dropped to just under $400 per month. I qualified for a subsidy but it was pretty low because my MAGI was near the upper limit. Still, this was a welcome relief from being underinsured and from paying through the nose as I had been for the last 5 years.

The premium rose to over $00 in 2015 but I had a decent, but not terrific plan (Silver). When I got sick in the summer of 2015 and had to be hospitalized for 12 days, I was covered. I hit my deductible quickly so everything after that was covered in full except for a key diabetes drug which was not covered. My doctor gave me free samples until he had weaned me off it by the end of the year. I also was stuck with the crummy outfit ExpressScripts for my covered drugs.

I changed insurance companies to start 2016 and was able to keep all of my doctors. My premium dropped some but was still over $400 a month. I was rid of ExpressScripts, too.

But for 2017, my new company (OSCAR) told me some of my doctors were being dropped. As I wrote in another thread, I would have to either (1) change one doctor, (2) change insurance companies, or (3) see that doctor out-of-network and pay him more, perhaps a negotiated rate similar to what he'd get had he remained in that network.

If the ACA disappears, I dread going back to paying a lot more for my coverage, without a subsidy, or go underinsured. All are lousy choices.
 
If they repeal, they will make sure option are offered (more likely through the insurance companies themselves, removing the government layer which only adds expenses and redistributes wealth). By adding competition (which has been completely removed by the ACA), the premiums and co-pays will decline.

And there is NO way that congress will get rid of the most popular aspects of the ACA (i.e. guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions and coverage of minors). These guys are politicians and do not want to lose their jobs. They saw what happened to senators that supported the ACA when things went bad. We can count on their self-interest to ensure that the popular parts are kept.

Hopefully we will have a variety of low cost coverage options and are not forced to buy policies with coverage that we will never need. I am hopeful.
 
My Plan A was (and is) HI through DHs job. Plan B was deferred HI sign up through my jobs retiree system. They stopped offering Plan B about 3 months before my RIF paperwork was started but that was ok, I had Plan C, ACA. So now I will only have Plan A. Since both DH and I have significant pre existing conditions I now have to consider a new Plan B ---- find a job with benefits. Ick
 
If they repeal, they will make sure option are offered (more likely through the insurance companies themselves, removing the government layer which only adds expenses and redistributes wealth). By adding competition (which has been completely removed by the ACA), the premiums and co-pays will decline.
Insurance companies pulled out for 2017 because they were losing money. I'm not sure how "competition" will cause the premiums and copays to decline significantly or at all.
 
I thought about what people have posted about the Ryan plan a bit more. How could no pre-existing conditions test coincide in the same overall plan with high risk pools? If no one was checked for pre-existing conditions how would anyone be placed in a high risk pool? If the high risk pools are a part of a new program that does imply some kind of pre-existing checks will exist.
 
If there are no price caps then insurers can just make all policies prohibitively expensive for people over a certain age, like 55+.

Why would they do that? To reduce sales? If they can cover their costs and make a reasonable return on required capital then they will be happy... premiums will ultimately get to that level if there is sufficient competition.

Speaker Ryan's proposal would cap premiums at 5x, compared to the current 3x. IOW, age-rated premiums for the oldest could only be 5x the premiums for the youngest.
 
Insurance companies pulled out for 2017 because they were losing money. I'm not sure how "competition" will cause the premiums and copays to decline significantly or at all.

+1 Since the increased cost of health insurance is being driven by skyrocketing medical services costs.... that is the big nut that needs to be addressed.. if you fix that then with MLR in place you fix health insurance.
 
Insurance companies pulled out for 2017 because they were losing money. I'm not sure how "competition" will cause the premiums and copays to decline significantly or at all.

I think it had to do with amounts the Government would pay for health services.

Certainly insurance companies make money on Medicare, they offer many plans, but they did not want to be part of the ACA. The ACA was severely flawed, and that needs to be changed. Even Medicaid patients have issues finding doctors.

I hope they add an additional payroll tax to help it, and stay away from any income tax increases. It would be funded more like medicare, which seems to work. Then offer Medicare to everyone in the USA. I suspect that any new plan would be closer to Medicare,
 
......... Since the increased cost of health insurance is being driven by skyrocketing medical services costs.... that is the big nut that needs to be addressed.............
I totally agree. All the talk about tweaking methods for paying for medical care via insurance schemes ignores the fact that it just costs too much in the US. I don't feel that we have had an honest evaluation of how to reduce overall costs and still deliver quality care, as is done in other developed countries. Reform to this date seems to me to be just political horsetrading between legislators and their financial supporters.
 
A good blog post on the subject.

A budget reconciliation bill can be passed by a simple majority and cannot be stopped by a filibuster. Congress took a dry run at repeal budget reconciliation legislation in 2015.

Both houses of Congress passed reconciliation legislation that would have repealed the premium tax credits; the small business tax credit; the individual mandate, the employer mandate; the expansion of Medicaid coverage for adults up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level, presumptive eligibility, maintenance of effort, and benchmark plans for Medicaid; and the ACA’s taxes—the medical device tax, insurer fee, “Cadillac” high cost plan tax, and tax increases imposed on the wealthy—most of the provisions that the public identifies as “Obamacare.”
The 2015 legislation would have delayed the end of the premium tax credits until 2018 to allow time for replacement legislation, which was not part of the bill.

The legislation was vetoed by President Obama. Presumably this legislation, already vetted for compliance with reconciliation requirements, could serve as a model for ACA repeal.

Importantly, reconciliation legislation could probably not change the insurance reform provisions of the ACA—the ban on preexisting condition exclusions and health status underwriting, caps on annual and lifetime dollar limits, actuarial value requirements, age underwriting restrictions, as they do not affect revenues and outlays. The continued imposition of these requirements without the financing provided by the ACA could cause serious distortions and damage in insurance markets.

The Affordable Care Act contains hundreds of provisions affecting Medicare, program integrity, the health care workforce, biosimilars, prevention, and other issues unrelated to what most Americans think of as “Obamacare.” Immediate repeal of the ACA and presumably restoring the law that preceded it would likely bring the Medicare program, for example, to a halt until new rules could be written. The ACA is inextricably interwoven into our health care system and is not going away immediately.

A Republican replacement plan could not be implemented overnight, however. Regulations would have to be written and published for comment and mechanisms set up to handle the deductions or credits, particularly if they were provided in advance, as they would have to be. Even a two year delay might not be enough to get a program in place, much less to educate the public as to how it operated.

Reference: Day One And Beyond: What Trump’s Election Means For The ACA
 
Last edited:
If the ACA disappears, I dread going back to paying a lot more for my coverage, without a subsidy, or go underinsured. All are lousy choices.
Do you think you would ever go back to work just to get health insurance?

I have found it very difficult to find work at age 50+.

I had thought that the ACA would be tweaked, but now it looks like wholesale gut. :(
 
I don't feel that we have had an honest evaluation of how to reduce overall costs and still deliver quality care, as is done in other developed countries.

Quite a few years ago, I watched the 2008 documentary Sick Around The World. I was impressed with how backward the US healthcare system appeared compared to some other mature democracies. It would be timely for PBS to produce an update to this documentary, since the issues it brings up are still relevant.

Here's a link to the documentary: Sick Around The World
 
Quite a few years ago, I watched the 2008 documentary Sick Around The World. I was impressed with how backward the US healthcare system appeared compared to some other mature democracies. It would be timely for PBS to produce an update to this documentary, since the issues it brings up are still relevant.

Here's a link to the documentary: Sick Around The World

Part of the problem is that we think we know best.
I doubt that is going to change with the new administration.
The mature democracies are demonized as having socialized medicine.
 
Folks, it will be helpful if we stick to the thread topic. :)
 
Part of the problem is that we think we know best.

I think our problem runs deeper than that. People here want unlimited healthcare, and to extend life no matter the cost. That is not compatible with free and less expensive health care.
 
I think our problem runs deeper than that. People here want unlimited healthcare, and to extend life no matter the cost. That is not compatible with free and less expensive health care.
That may or may not be the driver of high health care costs. I'd like to see a comprehensive analysis of where the money really goes. It seems like we have bits and pieces of anecdotes floating around, but no solid analysis, no common facts. With costs at $9000 a year per person, it might even be worth paying a few million dollars to have it done.
 
Do you think you would ever go back to work just to get health insurance?

I have found it very difficult to find work at age 50+.

I had thought that the ACA would be tweaked, but now it looks like wholesale gut. :(

I would not consider going back to work just to get health insurance. If I end up paying $1,000 a month for health insurance, I will do it. At least I am only 6 years away from being able to gain unfettered access to my IRA, the first of my "reinforcements" which will supplement the dividends my taxable portfolio generates. And I did have the ACA during the time I became sick last year and ran up some big medical bills - going forward my costs are maintenance ones.

I, too, am sad and scared about the ACA disappearing and being replaced (maybe) with something far inferior, or with nothing.
 
That may or may not be the driver of high health care costs. I'd like to see a comprehensive analysis of where the money really goes. It seems like we have bits and pieces of anecdotes floating around, but no solid analysis, no common facts. With costs at $9000 a year per person, it might even be worth paying a few million dollars to have it done.

I am all for it. And you would think somebody else would have thunk about it.

I suspect people do not want the facts known, for obfuscation. ;)

Once you know the facts, what do you do with it? Suppose we find out a lot of costs goes into this treatment, this category of drugs.

Now, we have to ask ourselves, is it worth it? See, recognizing one thing leads us to ask more and tougher questions. So, just sweep it under the rug.
 
Last edited:
How can an individual who is in the beginning stage of early retirement, who doesn’t have access to retiree based or other health insurance coverage, with relatively low living expenses and MAGI (modified adjusted gross income), and potentially high health care costs (previous cancer diagnosis), manage his/her financial and investment affairs to maximize benefits and minimize costs as a health care consumer with Trump/Republican likely changes to the system.

For example, managing MAGI under Obamacare was a way to maximize subsidies/credits and benefit from a more generous cost sharing plan. So, what can a FIREd person due to maximize his/her insurance coverage and minimize his/her insurance costs based on the changes that Trump will likely bring into the system? Try to keep income within Medicaid eligibility criteria? Relocate to a state that had an individual mandate prior to Obamacare (like Massachusetts)? Try to manage MAGI at a level to match the amount of health insurance premiums paid that are deductible?

I guess I am just trying to accept the current state of what “is” and maximize my benefits and minimize my costs within this new system that is evolving. Any ideas? And if possible, I would love to not have to return to the workplace solely to get access to health insurance.

For the sake of my questions, assume that the "repeal and replace" trump agenda will include the following (I am not asking about the pros and cons of these policies, I am just asking about how I can minimize my cost/maximize my gain within these changes)-

a. No mandate that requires everyone to have health insurance

b. Elimination of tax subsidies and credits.

c. Individual health insurance premiums completely deductible from income taxes.

d. Allow insurance companies to sell plans across state lines. (I would rather not relocate solely based on the need for reasonably priced health insurance).

e. The use of health savings accounts, or HSAs. Essentially, you pay for your medical expenses with your savings—if you have them. (Are these kind of a waste when you are dealing with the catastrophic cost of a cancer diagnosis?)

f. Medicaid, giving each state a block grant to divvy up as it chooses.

g. No pre-existing conditions exclusion. (I recognize that a and g are in direct conflict with one another, but that is the proposal as of today).

h. Add price transparency for drug companies and healthcare providers, and intense negotiating.

Oh, and I can't vouch for its validity or reliability, but here is a calculator that estimates how much you will pay for health insurance costs based on the system in effect before obamacare, during obamacare, based on clinton's proposals, based on sanders's proposals and based on trump's proposals. Based on my situation, the money i keep per year would be about the same for all proposals except for Sanders' where i allegedly would have kept about 25 percent more than under the other plans. https://www.taxrate.xyz/
 
How can an individual who is in the beginning stage of early retirement, who doesn’t have access to retiree based or other health insurance coverage, with relatively low living expenses and MAGI (modified adjusted gross income), and potentially high health care costs (previous cancer diagnosis), manage his/her financial and investment affairs to maximize benefits and minimize costs as a health care consumer with Trump/Republican likely changes to the system.

get catastrophic coverage - like I posted earlier, the purpose of health insurance isn't to provide inexpensive healthcare, it's to indemnify an unexpected loss
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom