Ohhh......never thought of that!
Guess we all need to pull contracts for the Holy Trinity of MAPD(Humana,UHC,AETNA)and see if renewals are a specific dollar set in stone.
Countdown to cms final ruling
- Thread starter DonP
- Start date
Guess we all need to pull contracts for the Holy Trinity of MAPD(Humana,UHC,AETNA)and see if renewals are a specific dollar set in stone.
they can and I can take my non commission clients to a plan that will pay me and be better for them
- Thread starter
- #43
100% I’m saying that . Mapd commissions are adjusted yearly . Your 2014-2019 renewals are vastly less than your 2023 renewals . Max cms commissions are declared annually . A carrier is free to do $0 to the max allowed every yr . Like this year renewals are $25.50 a month .Humana could have declared there paying $18 a month . Now they somewhat know there business will be rolled so it’s kep carriers from doing . Unfortunately in 2025 there’s going to be major issues on profitability due to increased utilization of services and an almost zero increase in Medicare funding . Carriers have a tough choice . Do they decrease medical benefits and keep extra benefits level or vice-versa . Humana already said it’s possible they pull out of areas and not focus on growing enrollment but focus on margins . Now you’d assume if they pay no marketing money and ax overrides that’s a huge pot of money .
Also carriers could declare little commission to the agent and roll to mostly direct to carrier model . All this I’m talking of applies to aca also . Anything can happen it’s why you must diversify your business . Do life and annuity’s also .2025 will be wild . I read today from deft research I believe there’s been big rolling of plans this oep up greater than all other previous yrs .
Thankfully, the competition among carriers, keeps them accountable to a certain degree. It would be of concern if one carrier grew to a size that it could corner the market.
It's my opinion that the creation of non commissionable plans, also creates conflict of interest, which is not advantageous to the consumer. The carriers should be paying flat commissions across the board, as intended by CMS.
You're not wrong. My MA renewals from 2015 are over $10 less per app monthly. The carriers do have flexibility.
The big carriers offer sizable dental benefits, and OTC, relative to the small regional carriers (that I see). However the small regional carriers seem to have less turnover, higher consumer loyalty (from my narrow viewpoint).
The carriers can trim benefits, and continue to pay the agents. Unfortunately, they also answer to shareholders.
However, if a carrier cuts the agents out, and it backfires, I dont think they could build that bridge back
InsuranceGuy29
Guru
- 777
This already happened with Cigna, a few years back. They created a few PDP's that were non-commissionable. Stupid move.
Not only did they find that brokers weren't writing the non-commissionable plans (Gee...."Whooduh thunk??"), agents also mostly stopped writing ANY Cigna Medicare plans, period.
You spook and/or disrespect the brokers, believe me, they'll make you regret it, and make you pay.
It was probably the idea of some 30 year old dumb upper manager kid who has an MBA, but no common sense/street smarts.
Brokers are actually a very cheap benefit, overall. Any of these companies would be stupid to pull a move like that.
Same thing happened on the Obamacare under-65 marketplace, a few years prior. Almost all of them cut commissions completely, and surprise surprise, they all lost tons of money.
Fast forward to present day, and all the commissions are either just as good or better than Medicare plans. When are these companies finally gonna learn?? You need the brokers and they're a cheap benefit. Leave them alone.
Last edited:
Special Agent
Guru
- 517
I understand that
What i still am not clear on is for example if UHC says for business effective after 2020 they pay the max allowable commission and lifetime renewals that are bumped up to newest allowable max commission when CMS adjust that for inflation....
Can UHC now say as of 2025 we no longer will pay you any renewals for active business written from 2020-2024?
If UHC made these plan written from 2020-2024 un commissionable starting 2025 does the contract say they can stop paying renewals? I have some active plans with UHC that are currently un commissionable for new business but they still pay me renewals so don't know if it is by choice or in the contract.
- Thread starter
- #48
Yes your correct . They could have made the uncommissionable plan you still get paid on also no commissions if the wanted . Your confusing mapd with med sups . Sups your vested . Mapd commissions are declared yearly . After the current yr your at the mercy of the company . But let’s also say if a company goes to zero commissions there business will be shrewded big . So I doubt most will wholesale eliminate comp. Maybe cut it
Special Agent
Guru
- 517
Ok the way i read this proposed change is the max is 642.00 and the carriers could possibly require use to complete HRA to get this full amount?
Specifically, CMS is proposing to redefine “compensation” to set a clear, fixed amount that agents and brokers can be paid regardless of the plan the beneficiary enrolls in, addressing loopholes that result in commissions above this amount that create anti-competitive and anti-consumer steering incentives. The proposal ensures the payment of agent and broker compensation reflects only the legitimate activities required of agents and brokers by broadening the scope of the regulatory definition of “compensation” so that it is inclusive of all activities associated with the sales to/enrollment of a beneficiary into a Medicare Advantage plan or Part D plan. The proposed national agent/broker fixed compensation amount for Medicare Advantage is $642. This proposed fixed amount for Medicare Advantage compensation, compared to the existing national compensation cap of no more than $611, would eliminate the current variability in payments and improve the predictability of compensation for agents and brokers.
- Thread starter
- #50
Ok the way i read this proposed change is the max is 642.00 and the carriers could possibly require use to complete HRA to get this full amount?
Specifically, CMS is proposing to redefine “compensation” to set a clear, fixed amount that agents and brokers can be paid regardless of the plan the beneficiary enrolls in, addressing loopholes that result in commissions above this amount that create anti-competitive and anti-consumer steering incentives. The proposal ensures the payment of agent and broker compensation reflects only the legitimate activities required of agents and brokers by broadening the scope of the regulatory definition of “compensation” so that it is inclusive of all activities associated with the sales to/enrollment of a beneficiary into a Medicare Advantage plan or Part D plan. The proposed national agent/broker fixed compensation amount for Medicare Advantage is $642. This proposed fixed amount for Medicare Advantage compensation, compared to the existing national compensation cap of no more than $611, would eliminate the current variability in payments and improve the predictability of compensation for agents and brokers.
No the $642 includes “$31” extra . That means the agent gets $611 and the fmo gets $31 . But But But any company can break up that $642 any way they want want. Before there was max comp of $611 and any amount of administrative fee( a fancy word for fmo overrides and marketing money ) . So the strongest carriers could bully the small weak carriers and pay much more overrides to “steer” business to the large carriers . Cms is saying no no . We’re leveling the playing field at $611 plus $31 for ALL carriers . This is so agents and fmo will have no financial incentive to “steer” business . But the truth is if agents don’t sell the best plan they’ll be replaced .
