The Academy's Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) Regulation Work Group sent a letter on April 20 to Lou Felice, chairperson of the NAIC Health Care Reform Solvency Impact Subgroup, and Steven Ostlund, chairperson of the NAIC Accident and Health Working Group. The letter identified eight key questions related to medical loss ratio considerations in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148).
The MLR Work Group sent a second letter to the NAIC on April 28 that addressed MLR considerations and the potential disruptive impact that their implementation could have on the individual health insurance market.
During the past two weeks, the Academy met with representatives of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on several issues of interest, including medical loss ratios, the creation of a temporary high risk pool, the premium review process and the creation of a new voluntary long-term care program (commonly referred to as the CLASS Act).
Legislative Updates
The Office of the Actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services released on April 22 its estimates of the financial and coverage effects through fiscal year 2019 of select provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (P.L. 111-52). The report found that the overhaul would increase national health spending by 0.9 percent between 2010 and 2019.
The Senate Budget Committee passed a budget resolution (S. Con. Res. 60) on April 26 that includes provisions that would reduce the threshold for the itemized deduction for unreimbursed medical expenses from 10 percent to 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income and reinstate the business deduction for Medicare Part D employer subsidies, provided that the deficit does not increase between 2010 and 2015 or between 2010 and 2020. In addition, the resolution would delay any low- and middle-income tax increases enacted under the two new health care laws until Jan. 1, 2014.
In the News
Academy Senior Health Fellow Cori Uccello suggested possible ways that regulators could strengthen the individual health insurance coverage mandate contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to limit adverse selection. As reported in Money Magazine/CNNMoney.com on April 22, one of the non-financial incentives Uccello discussed was placing limits on participants' ability to upgrade insurance plans.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee's investigation of companies that posted one-time non-cash charges against earnings -- resulting from a section of the new health care reform law that eliminates a tax deduction for providing retiree drug benefits -- found that the companies had acted properly and in accordance with accounting standards. As reported in the New York Times on April 26, the committee staff said that independent experts from the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the Academy had confirmed its findings. The Academy's confirmation was also cited in a related April 27 Investor's Business Daily editorial.
News links are to external websites. The Academy is not responsible for the content of these websites.
Have ideas to share? We want to hear from you. E-mail us at: health@actuary.org