5 Ways 2020 Medigap Changes Are Driving States Wild

Northeast Agent

Guru
1000 Post Club
2,055
Pennsylvania
5 Ways 2020 Medigap Changes Are Driving States Wild | ThinkAdvisor

4. The MACRA Medigap deductible requirements have holes

For regulators, one challenge is that Congress included exclusions in the minimum-deductible requirements.

Consumers who buy Medigap Plan C or Medigap Plan F policies before Jan. 1, 2020, can keep their policies, and they can buy renewal policies. That means regulators will have to take care to know which sales of first-dollar coverage are illegal and which are legal.
 
2 other interesting parts

3. Issuers that sell Medigap Plan C or Medigap Plan F after Jan. 1, 2020, could face compliance nightmares.

The federal government could impose a fine of up to $25,000 per prohibited act, and the person or company responsible for the prohibited Medigap letter plan sales could end up going to prison for five years.

That means what states do or don’t do could have major repercussions for the companies or persons responsible for complying with the MACRA requirements.

And this

“ Some agents are telling their policyholders that premiums for coverage under Plans C or F will be increasing to such an extent that they should purchase other coverage,” officials write. “These are misleading statements to induce policyholders to improperly switch coverage using marketing and sales techniques that are in clear violation of the Medicare supplement insurance laws and a states’ unfair trade practices laws. If a state finds such activity, the state can take appropriate administrative action.”
 
Can't say I follow this.

Regulators and insurers have responded to the new requirements by creating two new Medigap letter plans, for people who will become eligible for Medicare on or after Jan. 1, 2020: Medigap Plan D and Medigap Plan G.

Only a handful of carriers offer D but most everyone has a G plan. The G plan has been around for years. So why does the article make it seem as if these plans are newly created?

Issuers that sell Medigap Plan C or Medigap Plan F after Jan. 1, 2020, could face compliance nightmares.

As I understand, carriers are not REQUIRED to offer C and F after 1/1/20 but are ALLOWED to offer those plans to persons eligible for Medicare prior to 1/1/20.

My guess is all carriers will discontinue writing C and F as of 1/1/20.

This is perhaps similar to DC banning traditional major medical plans as of 1/1/2014 and replacing them with Obamacare metal plans. I don't know of a single carrier that offered a non-metal major med plan after January 2014.

Problem solved.

Consumers who buy Medigap Plan C or Medigap Plan F policies before Jan. 1, 2020, can keep their policies, and they can buy renewal policies.

This isn't the first time CMS has dropped letter plans. The J plan was discontinued (I believe) in 2010. This move did not create a problem for regulators. Why is this different?

Regulators say in the Senior Issues Task Force guidance that an employer can still after first-dollar Medigap coverage after Jan. 1, 2020, but AARP cannot.

Can someone explain this in English?

Whoever penned this article appears to have little understanding of how Medigap plans actually work.
 
Only a handful of carriers offer D but most everyone has a G plan. The G plan has been around for years. So why does the article make it seem as if these plans are newly created?

I saw that, too but I guess the coffee hadn't kicked in enough yet for me to really notice. Wasn't D supposed to be one of the new "go-to" plans, like N, because it won't be a GI plan like G starting in 2020?

Regulators say in the Senior Issues Task Force guidance that an employer can still after first-dollar Medigap coverage after Jan. 1, 2020, but AARP cannot.

I think this is regarding the group retiree plans, some of which aren't a true supplement plan. So they can keep their "F" plan. But the AARP/UHC group retiree plans are actual med supps.
 
Consumers who buy Medigap Plan C or Medigap Plan F policies before Jan. 1, 2020, can keep their policies, and they can buy renewal policies.

This isn't the first time CMS has dropped letter plans. The J plan was discontinued (I believe) in 2010. This move did not create a problem for regulators. Why is this different?

Did the J options allow a Plan J holder to switch carriers or to return to a Plan J if they dropped the one they held when the legislation went into effect?
 
“ Some agents are telling their policyholders that premiums for coverage under Plans C or F will be increasing to such an extent that they should purchase other coverage,” officials write. “These are misleading statements to induce policyholders to improperly switch coverage using marketing and sales techniques that are in clear violation of the Medicare supplement insurance laws and a states’ unfair trade practices laws. If a state finds such activity, the state can take appropriate administrative action.”

And how are these misleading statements when it is common sense what will happen with these plans, especially if you offer it as an opinion? Isn't that why we are agents, to guide them?
 
“ Some agents are telling their policyholders that premiums for coverage under Plans C or F will be increasing to such an extent that they should purchase other coverage,” officials write. “These are misleading statements to induce policyholders to improperly switch coverage using marketing and sales techniques that are in clear violation of the Medicare supplement insurance laws and a states’ unfair trade practices laws. If a state finds such activity, the state can take appropriate administrative action.”

And how are these misleading statements when it is common sense what will happen with these plans, especially if you offer it as an opinion? Isn't that why we are agents, to guide them?


I agree, But I have heard this before, I believe I have seen a video of an AARP seminar where they were saying it was illegal to tell clients plan F premiums may go up due to changes in 2020 something about rogue agents saying premiums would go up
 
“ Some agents are telling their policyholders that premiums for coverage under Plans C or F will be increasing to such an extent that they should purchase other coverage,” officials write. “These are misleading statements to induce policyholders to improperly switch coverage using marketing and sales techniques that are in clear violation of the Medicare supplement insurance laws and a states’ unfair trade practices laws. If a state finds such activity, the state can take appropriate administrative action.”

And how are these misleading statements when it is common sense what will happen with these plans, especially if you offer it as an opinion? Isn't that why we are agents, to guide them?

Yeah, that’s not cool.

While I agree, it should not be used as a scare tactic, it’s also not outside of reality that Plan G or N will likely be a better long-term option.
 
Back
Top