IBJNews

VCs: Health benefits will be defined contribution

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Increasing government involvement in the health insurance market will have the counter-intuitive effect of making the industry more consumer-driven, concludes a new report from a health care venture-capital firm.

Psilos Group, based in New York and Silicon Valley, predicts that ever-increasing cost pressures and new features in the 2010 health reform law will lead many employers to shift their approach to health insurance from a defined benefit for their workers, to a defined contribution—similar to the shift from pensions to 401(k)s.

That means millions more Americans will be buying health insurance on their own—using money given by their employer or government-provided subsidies in the state insurance exchanges the law will create.

New York-based research firm McKinsey & Co. has predicted that the percentage of Americans buying health insurance individually—as opposed to joining an employer-purchased plan—could spike to as high as 40 percent, from just 10 percent now.

In turn, health insurers will have to significantly change how they interact with customers, Psilos predicts. They’ll have to shift from a business-to-business model to a business-to-consumer model.

“A lot of times today when consumers think about their health plans, they assume their phone call won’t get answered, they’re going to get materials they don’t understand and they’re going to have providers in the network they don’t want,” Lisa Suennen, a Psilos managing member, told Healthcare Finance News. “But if you are an employee and you now are being given a chunk of change to go buy a plan on your own, you’re going to look for the kinds of things you look for when you buy a car: friendly salesperson, quality service, ‘I understand what’s happening’—the paperwork and all that.”

Psilos even predicts that some private companies—such as Wal-Mart, Amazon or Google—might create health insurance exchanges. Already, employers who were buying Medicare supplement insurance for their over-65 workers have begun sending them to a private exchange operated by California-based Extend Health Inc.

And health insurers can forget passing on 8- to 10-percent premium increases every year, as they do now with employers, Suennen said. She expects employers to link their annual health insurance contributions to wage increases, which have been rising 2 percent to 3 percent per year.

“The realities of defined contribution will drive consumers to shop for the best value,” Suennen said. She added, “Consumers are going to be forced to become educated and highly efficient buyers, just as they are with other kinds of insurance.”

Read the full report here.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Getting the consumer involved
    THis is the problem with healthcare. When the user (patient) and provider (doctor) have no idea what the true costs of tests and procedures cost, why would they care if they did 4-5 unnecessary tests. Once the consumer has "skin" in the game, they will become more involved; asking if tests are necessary.

    Also, we as a nation must address our unhealth life styles. Taking care of yourself will lead to lower cost health care. Having company sponsored healthcare has lead us to living an unhealthy lifestyle and using medication to "feel" good.
    Heather
    www.mymedigapconsultant.com
  • Cost if individual policies
    My question would be how much more individuals will have to pay versus the group rates they currently get under their employers policies. I will be surprised if the rates will be competitive and I think most will see a sizeable increase that won't come close to employers' income increases that are set out to cover it. The meager fine imposed by the mandate will look real good to a lot of people!

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. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT