IBJNews

Health reform rule could cost WellPoint

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

There are more than 1,000 regulations waiting to be written as part of the recently passed health care law, but Indianapolis-based insurer WellPoint Inc. has about $800 million riding on one arcane rule: how to calculate a medical-loss ratio.

The ratio quantifies the percentage of customers’ premiums that were spent on medical care, rather than on overhead or profits. The new health law, signed by President Obama in March, requires the ratios to hit at least 80 percent on insurance policies for individuals or small business and at least 85 percent for large businesses.

If they don’t, health insurers must refund premiums to make up the shortfall.

The Wall Street Journal called the rule a “game changer” in a July 2 article.

“This is the biggest issue right now for the companies,” Sandy Praeger, the Kansas insurance commissioner who is chairing the National Association of Insurance Commissioners committee writing the medical-loss ratio rule, told the Journal.

A key issue is whether health insurers will have to meet the new threshold at each of their subsidiary companies, or whether they’ll be allowed to aggregate their companies’ results and produce one, corporate-wide medical-loss ratio.

At WellPoint, if the 80- and 85-percent rules had been applied to all its subsidiaries in 2009, the company would have had to refund about $800 million, according to an IBJ analysis of data collected by the U.S. Senate's Commerce Committee and the California Department of Managed Care.

That’s roughly 2.5 percent of the $33 billion in medical premiums that WellPoint’s state-regulated subsidiaries collected last year. It also represents about 40 percent of WellPoint's 2009 adjusted pre-tax profit margin.

The losses at WellPoint's subsidiaries would have been about the same even if the company had been allowed to pool its results, which is one option the insurance commissioners are considering.

However, some observers fear that health insurers will simply leave markets where they are well below the threshold, which could reduce consumer options.

To soften the blow of the new rule, WellPoint would like to include its spending on wellness programs, which it formerly characterized as administrative costs. Now, WellPoint wants to count those dollars as medical expenses.

The difference, which WellPoint adopted in its accounting in April, would helped the company add 1 percentage point to its medical-loss ratio—which would translate to about $330 million of that $800 million that it would not have to refund to customers.

WellPoint officials continue to be upbeat about the company’s chances under the new law. Chief Strategy Officer Brad Fluegel told the Wall Street Journal that the company’s size—33 million insured customers—would allow it more opportunities than its competitors to reduce costs, thereby meeting the new medical-loss-ratio caps.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • self inflicted
    I have zero sympathy for Wellpoint. They did this to themselves. If they hadn't been raising their rates by 39%, there wouldn't have been a need to take this step.
  • Look to the future...
    Look to the 7/7/10 WSJ article re the MASS healthcare reform plan if you wish to see where all this is headed.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. This is still my favorite Mexican restaurant in town. What I do love about the new version is it is much quieter than the most recent version. TV's were off, the music wasn't too loud, and the wait staff were not hyperactive like they had been the past few times I had been there. I just wish they would bring back the MOLE for the enchiladas!

  2. Not a bad paper. There is a need for local community news and city government issues. Don't really need the owner's constant national political rants. We all know where they stand by now.

  3. What nice people. Menard should've known better than to team up with the guy who robbed and drove Conseco to ashes. I'm surprised Timothy Durham isn't involved in this.

  4. Hello, I am Maris Peters, currently living in Texas city, USA. I am a widow at the moment with three kids and i was stuck in a financial situation in August 2014 and i needed to refinance and pay my bills. I tried seeking loans from various loan Companies both private and corporate but never with success, and most banks declined my credit. But as God would have it, I was introduced to a Man of God a private loan lender who gave me a loan of $65,000USD and today am a business owner and my kids are doing well at the moment, if you must contact any firm or company with reference to securing a loan without collateral , no credit check, no co signer with just 2% interest rate and better repayment plans and schedule, please contact Mr William David. He doesn’t know that am doing this but am so happy now and i decided to let people know more about him and also i want God to bless him more.You can contact him through his email: Davidloanfirm@yahoo.com

  5. It is beyond me how anyone can think this was a "bad deal" for the state! If they could take the money back then, yes, but they can't! Protections were built in the agreement. Now, if they roll the roads up and take them away, I will agree that it was a bad deal. Otherwise, the only way to have paid for the infrastructure that was badly needed was for the state to issue bonds....that is a four letter synonym for debt folks!!

ADVERTISEMENT