IBJNews

Report: Rebates from health care law will top $1B

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

More than 3 million health insurance policyholders and thousands of employers will share $1.3 billion in rebates this year, thanks to health care reforms, a nonpartisan research group said Thursday.

The rebates should average $127 for the people who get them, and Democrats are hoping they'll send an election-year message that President Obama's much-criticized health care overhaul is starting to pay dividends for consumers. Critics of the law call that wishful thinking.

Separately, a Goldman Sachs report estimated insurers would pay rebates of $1.2 billion. Among major insurers, UnitedHealth would pay $307 million, Aetna $177 million, Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc. $94 million and Coventry $50 million.

The law requires insurance companies to spend at least 80 percent of the premiums they collect on medical care and quality improvement or return the difference to consumers and employers. Although many large employer plans already meet that standard, it's the first time the government has imposed such a requirement on the entire health insurance industry.

"This is one of the most tangible benefits of the health reform law that consumers will have seen to date," said Larry Levitt, an expert on private insurance with the Kaiser Family Foundation, which analyzed industry filings with state health insurance commissioners to produce its report. Kaiser is a nonpartisan information clearinghouse on the nation's health care system.

Still, health insurance is expensive, and $127 may not even pay a month's worth of premiums for single coverage.

And the insurance industry says consumers should take little comfort from the rebates because premiums are likely to go up overall as a result of new benefits and other requirements of the law.

"The net of all the requirements will be an increase in costs for consumers," said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, the main industry trade group.

"Given that health care costs are inherently unpredictable, it's not surprising that some plans will be paying rebates to policyholders in certain markets," Zirkelbach added.

But the Kaiser report said the rebate requirement may be acting as a brake on the industry, discouraging insurers from seeking big premium increases to avoid having to issue refunds later and face possible criticism.

The new law has "provided an incentive for insurers to seek lower premium increases than they would have otherwise," the report said. "This 'sentinel' effect on premiums has likely produced more savings for consumers and employers than the rebates themselves."

The study found the largest rebates will go to consumers and employers in Texas ($186 million) and Florida ($149 million), where Govs. Rick Perry and Rick Scott have been among the staunchest opponents of the federal law. Both states applied for waivers from the 80 percent requirement and were turned down. Hawaii is the only state in which insurers are not expected to issue a rebate.

Here's how the rebates break down nationally:

More than 3 million individual policyholders will reap rebates of $426 million, averaging $127 apiece. These are consumers who are not covered through an employer and buy their policy directly. Consumers in Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Arizona are most likely to be eligible.

Insurance companies must notify policyholders, and the rebates are due by Aug. 1. Some companies have already begun to pay.

In the small-employer market, plans covering nearly 5 million people will receive rebates totaling $377 million.

Employers do not have to pass their rebates on to workers, and can also take them as a discount on next year's premiums.

Insurers serving large employers face a stiffer requirement. Under the law, they must spend 85 percent of premiums on medical costs. The study found that 125 plans covering 7.5 million people at large employers will give back a total of $541 million.

Most plans operated by major national employers are exempt from the requirement. The biggest companies usually set aside money to cover most of their workers' medical expenses. Typically they hire an insurer to administer their plan, but they do not buy full coverage from the insurer.

Supporters of the requirement say it will keep insurers from padding their profits at the expense of unsuspecting consumers.

"Millions are benefiting because health insurance companies are spending less money on executive salaries and administrative costs and more on patient care," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., a leading advocate of the rebate provision.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said the report shows how Obama's law is "already strengthening the health care system for millions of Americans."

Like everything else about the overhaul, the future of the rebates depends on whether the Supreme Court upholds the law in a decision expected by early summer.

Seventeen states applied for waivers from the 80 percent standard, producing evidence that it would destabilize their private health insurance markets. Federal regulators granted adjustments to seven states, usually meeting each state's request part way.

Data from the nation's most populous state, California, were not ready and thus were not included. Final statistics on the rebates will be issued by the federal government in early summer.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Rebates
    When I start reading this all I remember is blah blah blah. Same BS, new story. I am sooo proud.

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. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT