Health care spending accounts: a flexible solution for Canadian employers

Flexible benefits plans have grown more slowly in Canada than in the United States, largely because of certain legal and regulatory considerations. Health care spending accounts (HCSAs) provide a cost-effective way for Canadian employers to address the health care benefit needs of a diverse workforce. A flexible health care spending account is a versatile and cost-effective instrument that can be used by Canadian employers that wish to provide a full range of health care benefits to employees. The health care alternatives available through an HCSA can provide employees with an opportunity to customize and optimize their benefits program. Regulatory requirements that an HCSA must meet in order to qualify for available tax advantages are discussed, as are the range of health care services that may be covered.     

Employee contributions: a primer on their use, historical trends and overall fit within benefits strategy

This article focuses on the use of employee contributions as a strategic tool within employee health plans. While most employers require some form of employee contributions for health care, there is no clear "one-size-fits-all" solution. A myriad of strategies are in place, some active and some passive. This article reviews both common and emerging strategies and how they differ based on industry, employer size and region; discusses how employee contribution strategy fits within overall benefits strategy; and provides a strategic framework for approaching employee contributions in the future.     

Optimum Allocations to Health Care Flexible Spending Accounts

Abstract

Models used to derive optimal contributions to health care flexible spending accounts (FSAs) typically assume an employee’s household annual out-of-pocket health care expenses are an absolutely continuously random variable. This assumption, however, ignores the fact that some employees may be able to accurately predict a portion of their household annual out-of-pocket health care expenses and often actually incur only those expenses during the plan year, implying that a mixed random variable may be more appropriate. In addition, data have shown that employees are setting contributions at lower levels than existing absolutely continuous models would suggest is optimal. Using a mixed model of household annual out-of-pocket health care expenses we prove that it is often optimal for employees to contribute an amount equal to their household annual predictable out-of-pocket expenses, thus avoiding the risk of forfeiture. We also propose a practical rule of thumb that employees may use for setting their FSA contributions. Overall, we recommend that employees use their FSAs to cover only their highly predictable out-of-pocket health care expenses rather than use their FSAs as a contingency fund to pay for unlikely or unexpected outof-pocket health care expenses.     

Retiree health care benefits: new rules, new strategies.

Two recent court decisions in a retiree health care benefits age discrimination case are likely to bring changes to employer-sponsored retiree health care. After reviewing the cases and how the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has responded to them, this article discusses employer implications. Although the court decisions add complexity to retiree health plan design, they also provide employers with the valuable opportunity to analyze the match between their retiree health plans and business needs.     

Member Plan Choice and Migration in Response to Changes in Member Premiums after Massachusetts Health Insurance Reform

In 2006 Massachusetts implemented a substantial reform of its health insurance market that included a new program for uninsured individuals with income between 100% of Federal Poverty (the upper limit for state Medicaid benefits) and 300% of Federal Poverty. Enrollment was compulsory for all citizens because of a mandate. Consumers who enrolled in this program, which offered generous benefits with low copays, received graduated subsidies depending on their income. Five insurers were contracted to underwrite the program, and consumers were able to choose their insurer. Insurers bid annually, and the member contribution was set according to an affordability schedule for the lowest-bidding insurer. Consumers could choose from the range of insurers, but if they chose a plan other than the lowest cost, their contributions reflected the difference. Premiums were changed annually at July 1, and members were eligible to move to a different plan at this date; a number of members migrated each year. This study aims to quantify the effect of this premium-induced switching behavior. Prior studies of member switching behavior have looked at employer plans and estimated the elasticity of response to changes in member contributions. The Massachusetts environment is unique in that there is a mandate (so being uninsured is not an option) and members may choose insurer but not benefit plan. Thus a study of migration in Massachusetts is uniquely able to quantify the effect of price (contribution rates) on member switching behavior. We find elasticity averaging ?0.21 for 2013 (the last year of the study) to be somewhat lower (in absolute value) than previous studies of employer populations. Elasticity has also been significantly increasing with time and appeared to have at least doubled over the studied period (i.e., 2008–2013). Prior studies have estimated higher elasticities in the range ?0.3 to ?0.6. We found that the data contained many outliers in terms of both changes in contributions and percentage of members switching plans. The effect of outliers was moderated by the choice of robust regression models, leading us to question whether other studies may have been affected by outliers, leading to overestimates of the elasticities.     

Defining the road ahead: thinking strategically in the new era of health care reform

Understanding the implications of the new health care reform legislation, including those provisions that do not take effect for several years, will be critical in developing a successful strategic plan under the new environment of health care reform and avoiding unintended consequences of decisions made without the benefit of long-term thinking. Although this article is not a comprehensive assessment of the challenges and opportunities that exist under health care reform, nor a layout of all of the issues, it looks at some of the key areas in order to demonstrate why employers need to identify critical pathways and the associated risks and benefits of each decision. Key health care reform areas include insurance market reforms, grandfather rules, provisions that have the potential to influence the underlying cost of health care, the individual mandate, the employer mandate (including the free-choice voucher program) and the excise tax on high-cost plans.     

Alternatives to traditional Medicare: Medicare Part C poised to prosper

Recent events indicate that Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) plans are poised to prosper. Yet many employers express hesitation to offer Medicare Advantage, formerly known as Medicare+Choice, plans to their retirees because they are concerned about the potential withdrawal of those plans if there is a reversal of federal funding rules. This article addresses those concerns. It provides a historical overview of Medicare Part C and describes the impact of the most recent agency guidance. The author cites plan trends, raises employer implications and concludes that Medicare Advantage plans will continue to expand, possibly facilitated by employers as they implement leading-edge retiree medical designs.     

Managing health and welfare plans instead of letting them manage you

The explosive growth and change in the health care provider industry is presenting a considerable challenge to employers that manage these benefits for their employees. Corporate mergers, supportive federal and state legislation expanding benefit availability and access to new consumer markets are a few of the forces changing the shape of the industry. Furthermore, participants are more knowledgeable about their benefit plans and are more vocal about their needs. The authors discuss these challenges and possible solutions for the employer that is attempting to determine how plan delivery and management needs can be served in a way that supports business environment and strategy.     

The Effects of Offering Health Plan Choice Within Employment-Based Purchasing Groups

Employers may offer employees a choice of health plans either to promote competition among plans or to better cater to employee preferences for different types of products. This article examines whether the relationship between the availability of choice and insurance costs and coverage are consistent with these models of employer behavior. The results indicate that employers who offer choice have lower average premiums, primarily because employees are enrolled in less generous plans, and cover a greater proportion of workers than those who do not. The results are consistent with employers offering choice to accommodate diverse worker preferences.     

Health and welfare benefit litigation under ERISA

Denial of health benefits may result in devastating financial problems for the consumer. Given the complexities of the system, more and more employees turn to attorneys for help. Litigation and the resultant costs, in turn, further exacerbate the cost of providing benefits to employees and the burden to the employer. The law governing employer-paid health care and benefit plans is a blend of third party beneficiary contract law, trust law and administrative law. This article provides an overview of the federal litigation resulting from a third party payer's denial of coverage.     

Defined contribution health plan to consumer driven health benefits: evolution and experience

Today, the idea of placing more choice on employees "consuming" health care and giving them more responsibility and incentive to control health care costs and utilization is alive and thriving in the form of consumer-driven health care. This article examines the evolution of consumer-driven health benefits--including the experience of the first generation of "defined contribution" health care participants (i.e., retirees) and the results of different approaches employers have taken to early consumer-driven plan designs. The author then describes what's needed to answer the question: "Can consumer-driven health care control health cost?"     

How do low-income enrollees in the Affordable Care Act marketplaces respond to cost-sharing?

The Affordable Care Act requires insurers to offer cost-sharing reductions (CSRs) to low-income consumers on the marketplaces. We link 2013–2015 All-Payer Claims Data to 2004–2013 administrative hospital discharge data from Utah and exploit policy-driven differences in the actuarial value of CSR plans that are solely determined by income. This allows us to examine the effect of cost-sharing on medical spending among low-income individuals. We find that enrollees facing lower levels of cost-sharing have higher levels of healthcare spending, controlling for past healthcare use. We estimate demand elasticities of total health care spending among this low-income population of approximately −0.12, suggesting that demand-side price mechanisms in health insurance design work similarly for low-income and higher-income individuals. We also find that cost-sharing subsidies substantially lower out-of-pocket medical care spending, showing that the CSR program is a key mechanism for making health care affordable to low-income individuals.     

The Employer's Role in Reforming the U.S. Health Care System

In 2005 large U.S. employers spent an average of almost $7,400 per head on health care benefits, a 73% increase in the last five years. If the current trend continues, American companies may find it difficult to compete in a global marketplace where international competitors provide labor with heath care at a fraction of U.S. costs. This article argues that effective reform of the U.S. health care system will require major efforts from all major “stakeholders,” starting with the federal government and state and local governments and including insurance companies and the “consumers” of health care services. By far the important role, however, is reserved for private‐sector employers, which have been the incubator for recent innovations in American health care and are in the best position to coordinate and drive health care reform. But incremental steps in cost‐sharing, small‐scale pilot projects of consumer‐based designs, and employee awareness campaigns will not be enough. Employers need to take radical steps to break through the inertia that has built up among all stakeholders over the past 50 years. Chief among the author's proposals for employers are the following:

• ? In choosing a health care plan for employees, use value‐based purchasing criteria that consider more than just the price and access to services.
• ? Help consumers by demanding information from providers and insurers about the cost and efficacy of health care services, and of alternative treatments, before the choices are made.
• ? Encourage “consumerism” by setting up benefit plans that have a Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) or a Health Savings Account (HSA) component.

As the author states in closing, “Let these reforms begin with employers as the organizing force to drive needed change across the system. That may very well be the only way to save our employment‐based model.”     

The Influence of Culture on Pension Plans

It is widely recognized that culture is a dimension affecting a vast array of management and social choices. However, we know little about the effect of culture on choices that combine both business and social issues in an accounting setting. Employee benefit choices by managers reflect both the business choices of a firm in the selection and retention of employees and social choices in the type and extent of benefits provided to employees. The objective of this study is to investigate the extent to which culture affects employee benefits as manifested in pension plans. In a comparison of plans that differ according to the home country of the parent firm and are offered in the regulated environment of the United States, results indicate an effect of culture on pension plan choices. In particular, culture plays a role in determining the funding level percentage of the plan, employer contributions receivable, and revenues received or receivable from employers.     

Spousal surcharge programs--an overview

Spousal surcharge programs help employers whose goal is to provide "above-average" health benefit plans by limiting the potential "financial leakage" liabilities from covering the spouses of employees who are eligible for other health care coverage. Spousal surcharge programs are just one alternative available to help employers manage the rising cost of providing health care coverage to dependents. This article explores the prevalence, plan design, financial implications, administrative and other considerations in implementing a spousal surcharge program.     

The consumer-driven approach: can it pick up where managed care left off?

Managed care has failed and health care costs are once again out of control. Given the current political, social and economic environment, there are now two options: a single-payer health care system, or an aggressive and global employer health benefits redesign that strongly encourages consumer-driven behavior. This article discusses the failure of managed care and ways that employers can promote consumer-driven behavior now using available tools and plan provisions.     

Managed Care and Health Care Utilization: Specification of Bivariate Models Using Copulas

This article studies the effect of managed care on health care utilization compared to traditional fee-for-service plans in private health insurance market. To construct our hypothesis, we build a game-theoretic model to study health care utilization under a two-sided moral hazard: of patients and providers. In econometric modeling, we employ a copula regression to jointly examine individuals’ health plan choice and their utilization of medical care services, because of the endogeneity of insurance choice. The dependence parameter in the copula reflects the relation between the two outcomes, based on which the average treatment effects are further derived. We apply the methodology to a survey data set of the U.S. population and consider three types of curative care and three types of preventive care for the measurement of medical care utilization. We find that managed care is in general associated with higher care utilization. Evidence is also found on the underlying incentives of both patients and medical providers.     

What benefits managers should know about the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996

In consideration of the statutory requirements of the Mental Health Parity Act of 1996, the author stresses that benefits managers should consider three issues. First, the financial impact of the act should be minimal for most plans. Second, minimal compliance may require more extensive changes to the plan than originally anticipated. Finally, the process of compliance offers opportunity to examine broader issues of mental health coverage. The article explains what the act does and does not require. The article concludes with a presentation of a comparative analysis of the cost impact of the act on five prototype plan designs.     

Weak Links in the Chain II: A Prescription for Health Policy in Poor Countries

In an earlier article, the authors outline some reasons forthe disappointingly small effects of primary health care programsand identified two weak links standing between spending andincreased health care. The first was the inability to translatepublic expenditure on health care into real services due toinherent difficulties of monitoring and controlling the behaviorof public employees. The second was the "crowding out" of privatemarkets for health care, markets that exist predominantly atthe primary health care level. This article presents an approach to public policy in healththat comes directly from the literature on public economics.It identifies two characteristic market failures in health.The first is the existence of large externalities in the controlof many infectious diseases that are mostly addressed by standardpublic health interventions. The second is the widespread breakdownof insurance markets that leave people exposed to catastrophicfinancial losses. Other essential considerations in settingpriorities in health are the degree to which policies addresspoverty and inequality and the practicality of implementingpolicies given limited administrative capacities. Prioritiesbased on these criteria tend to differ substantially from thosecommonly prescribed by the international community.