WellPoint’s New York rate hike to face scrutiny

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WellPoint Inc.’s request to raise rates on small-business health plans in New York by as much as 28 percent will face increased scrutiny because of new U.S. regulations, the state’s top health insurance official said.

Federal rules released Tuesday tell state regulators to view rate-increase proposals of more than 10 percent as “initially unreasonable,” Louis Felice, head of New York’s Insurance Department’s health bureau, said in a telephone interview.

Indianapolis-based WellPoint’s Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield unit asked for premiums of 20 percent to 28 percent higher for more than 216,000 people in plans at businesses with 50 or fewer employees, Felice said. WellPoint, the biggest U.S. health insurer by enrollment, lost several rate-increase battles this year including in California, Connecticut and Maine.

In California, its request for an average 25 percent boost in premiums on plans for individuals was cut to 14 percent.

States will be able to reject insurer rate increases, while the federal government will be limited to only publishing data on the premiums, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is writing the rules.

State officials can choose to bar insurers with a pattern of rate increases that the law labels as “unreasonable” from new insurance exchanges that will be set up as part of funding coverage for 24 million newly insured individuals. The 10 percent threshold will change after 2011 to a state-by-state measurement based on the history of health costs in each state, according to the agency.

The insurance exchanges set up by the law that President Barack Obama signed in March will offer tax credits for people to buy private coverage by 2019. Starting this year, insurers must provide state and federal regulators with a written justification for any raised premium rates.

The administration estimates that as much as 70 percent of insurance offered in the small group and individual market will exceed the 10 percent threshold and will be subject to review.

Insurers are also subject to rules requiring the companies to spend at least 80 percent of premium revenue on patient care or rebate the difference to customers. Insurers as of 2014 won’t be able to reject people based on pre-existing conditions, and won’t be allowed to vary premiums widely based on people’s age or health status.

The rules define an “unreasonable” increase as one that lowers the percentage of premiums being spent on customers’ care below the 80 percent threshold, or that isn’t based on substantial evidence that health costs are rising, the agency said.


Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. From the story: "The city of Indianapolis also will consider tax incentives and funding for infrastructure required for the project, according to IEDC." Why would the City need to consider additional tax incentives when Lowe's has already bought the land and reached an agreement with IEDC to bring the jobs? What that tells me is that the City has already pledged the incentives, unofficially, and they just haven't had time to push it through the MDC yet. Either way, subsidizing $10/hour jobs is going to do nothing toward furthering the Mayor's stated goal of attracting middle and upper-middle class residents to Marion County.

  2. Ron Spencer and the entire staff of Theater on the Square embraced IndyFringe when it came to Mass Ave in 2005. TOTS was not only a venue but Ron and his friends created, presented and appeared in shows which embraced the 'spirit of the fringe'. He's weathered all the storms and kept smiling ... bon voyage and thank you.

  3. Not sure how many sushi restaurants are enough, but there are three that I know of in various parts of downtown proper and all are pretty good.

  4. First off, it's "moron," not "moran." 2nd, YOU don't get to vote on someone else's rights and freedoms that are guaranteed by the US Constitution. That's why this is not a state's rights issue...putting something like this to vote by, well, people like you who are quite clearly intellectually challenged isn't necessary since the 14th amendment has already decided the issue. Which is why Indiana's effort is a wasted one and a waste of money...and will be overturned just like this has in every other state.

  5. Rick, how does granting theright to marry to people choosing to marry same-sex partners harm the lives of those who choose not to? I cannot for the life of me see any harm to people who choose not to marry someone of the same sex. We understand your choice to take the parts of the bible literally in your life. That is fine but why force your religious beliefs on others? I'm hoping the judges do the right thing and declare the ban unconstitutional so all citizens of Wisconsin and Indiana have the same marriage rights and that those who chose someone of the same sex do not have less rights than others.