Menu Close

Tag: premiums

Composite Premiums in the Small Group Market in Virginia

On Oct. 7, 2014, the Virginia Bureau of Insurance published two documents relating to composite premiums in the Virginia small group market. As background, final rules issued by HHS on March 11, 2014, provided for a two-tiered federal calculation method for composite rates (one tier for each covered adult age 21 or older and a second tier for each covered child under age 21). However, the same final rule permitted states to substitute their own alternative to the federal methodology by seeking approval from HHS.

According to the two documents, Virginia has been approved for and will implement a four-tiered rating structure, including employee, employee plus spouse, employee plus children and employee plus family. This means that while insurers issuing small group market plans in Virginia may continue to provide per-member billing, they may choose to provide family composite premiums on an optional basis. If so, the insurer must follow the state’s four-tiered alternative method, and must make it available for each small employer in the market, regardless of size. Importantly, tiered composite rates must be set at the beginning of the plan year and do not change throughout the plan year, even if the distribution of employees among the tier levels changes.

The tiered-composite methodology applies to Virginia small employer premium rates for plans offered outside of the federally-facilitated exchange in Virginia beginning Jan. 1, 2015. Those offered on the exchange must use per-member ratings.

Composite Premiums in the Small Group Market in Virginia

Approved Virginia Alternate Methodology

On July 28, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in Bostic v. Rainey, No. 14-1167 (4th Cir. 2014), upheld a federal district court ruling against Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage. However, the court issued a stay on their ruling, meaning the ban on same-sex marriage remains in effect pending the outcome of any appeals. So for now, the ban remains the law in Virginia. The issue seems headed eventually to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Bostic v. Rainey

Read the full nationwide compliance report here.

Contact Steven G. Cosby, MHSA with questions or to request more information and to schedule a healthcare plan evaluation, savings analysis or group plan solution for your company.

cosby ig logo

ACA Tidbit

Under the Affordable Care Act, premiums can only vary based on the following factors: age, family composition, geographic area, and tobacco use.

Age:

  • Premium rates cannot vary by age for enrollees under the age of 21.
  • Premium rates cannot vary by age for enrollees age 64 or older.
  • Premium rates can vary by age for enrollees between the ages of 21 and 63, on each birthday, until a person turns 63.
  • Older enrollees cannot be charged more than 3 times the amount that younger enrollees are charged.

Family Composition:

  • Premiums may vary based on family composition.

Geographic Area:

  • Geographic rating areas are established by each state. If a state does not choose its geographic rating areas, it will default to rating areas established by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Tobacco Use:

  • Tobacco users cannot be charged more than 1.5 times the rate of non-users.

The Looming Premium Rate Shock

Well the confusion has begun! That is to assume that we all were not already there.

The respected publisher Forbes released an article on May 24, 2013 that shocked everyone. Rates to be offered on the California Insurance Exchange effective 01.01.2014 will actually be lower relative to our existing existing market rates.

Forbes contributor Rick Ungar writes that rates will actually be lower, not higher under Obama Care and the first round of rate releases in California proves this.  Surprising even Ungar, an Obama Care supporter!

These assertions are indirectly backed up by the Congressional Committee of Energy and Commerce  attacking a separate House Report on ACA that reports everyone is about to experience rate shock. Only to be followed up by Forbes article stating that there will be rate shock, rebutting its own Ungar article just a few days earlier.

Read the above links to learn more but know that they are both right.

Those sick and currently paying high rates will no longer be discriminated unfavorably by the insurance industry AND those well and health paying low rates will no longer be discriminated favorably by the industry.

It can be argued both ways by honest people.