IBJNews

Rules mostly falling WellPoint's way

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Health insurers such as WellPoint Inc. and UnitedHealth Group got a little bit of regulatory Meatloaf last week: Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad.

The insurers won fairly broad leeway under key rules suggested by state insurance commissioners that will govern what kinds of expenses count toward meeting a new federal threshold to spend at least 80 percent of premium dollars on medical care.

The proposal by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners said wellness efforts aimed at improving an individual customer’s health can be counted as medical expenses, but wellness and other efforts "should not be designed primarily to control or contain cost."

Also, insurers will be able to subtract from their total premium revenue most of what they pay in state and federal taxes. That would have the effect of increasing the companies' medical-loss ratios, which must exceed 80 percent for small companies and 85 percent for large ones.

"It's written the way insurers wanted it to be written, and so that is good for the insurers," Amy Thornton, an analyst at Concept Capital's Washington Research Group, told Reuters.

The proposal still must be approved by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. However the rules are finally written will have a big impact on insurers, because the new health law requires them to refund any premiums that should have been spent on medical care.

One thing that didn’t go the way Indianapolis-based WellPoint and others would like: Under the proposed rules, insurers would have to meet the 80-percent threshold for each of the numerous health plans they operate. Insurers wanted to be able to aggregate the ratios from all their plans.

The hit would have been equally significant, either way, for WellPoint 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.

But being able to count its wellness efforts as medical expenses should help chip $300 million or more off that hit. And WellPoint is working to reduce its administrative costs also to help comply with the new rule.

WellPoint, which insures more Americans than any other company, sees itself in better position to absorb the hits than any of its competitors, especially smaller companies. Some analysts agree that size will matter more than ever in the new environment.

"We also believe that these rules favor the larger managed-care organizations over smaller groups, as the larger companies have better actuarial systems and larger pools of patients over which to spread the risk,” Les Funtleyder, a health care analyst and investor at Miller Tabak & Co., wrote in a note to clients.

WellPoint expects those advantages to lead many smaller companies to put themselves up for sale. And WellPoint intends to capitalize. It holds a $20 billion war chest (in cash and investments) that it intends to use to buy other companies in the next two years.

“It’s going to be very important we maintain enough capital at the parent, or enough liquidity and ability to lever up, to be able to do transactions, because I really do think they’re going to present themselves over the next couple of years,” WellPoint Chief Financial Officer Wayne DeVeydt said at a recent investor conference. “And I think you’ll see further consolidation in the industry, significantly more than what we have seen over the last four, five years.”

ADVERTISEMENT

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. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

  2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

  3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

  4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

  5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

ADVERTISEMENT