- 6,458
Nah, that won't work anymore.
Free Plan now has to have Free Dental Coverage so you can go to the dentist and get the Free Toothbrush ALONG WITH Free Toothpaste and Free Floss.
Independent agents selling MAPD nationally
- Thread starter InsuranceKnight
- Start date
Nah, that won't work anymore.
Free Plan now has to have Free Dental Coverage so you can go to the dentist and get the Free Toothbrush ALONG WITH Free Toothpaste and Free Floss.
- 16,881
Yes but my plan also has a lint brush. So I could flip them every single time if I wanted to take those cases.Nah, that won't work anymore.
Free Plan now has to have Free Dental Coverage so you can go to the dentist and get the Free Toothbrush ALONG WITH Free Toothpaste and Free Floss.
I have clients in 14 states. I've done what needs to be done, & paid the fees that need to be paid, to be licensed, and appointed, to support my clients in those states. I have long-lived, face-to-face friendships with a handful of my clients; I have never met most of my clients in person.
I help beneficiaries devise coverage strategies, thinking/talking through what their needs are, what their options are, and what the processes are to evaluate & enroll in coverage that fits them/their spouse/their loved ones. I have never, ever, not ever, enrolled anyone in the course of a single phone call.
I'm a broker. My clients are, as far as I can determine, exclusively referrals. If I have ever "sold" anything, it has been myself, and then only incidentally.
The well-intended regulations CMS announced its intention to implement today may, unintentionally, impact me and my clients adversely. Neither regulators nor executives of bodies that purportedly represent the interests of brokers in such matters seem ever to even imagine that professionals like me actually exist. The proposed regulation's intent notwithstanding, it makes zero sense for insurers to be held responsible for my "marketing" behaviors. While I collaborate with insurers in the sense that my clients may eventually be their policyholders - if the fit is right - I compete with them for my clients' "mindshare" (yechhh, buzzwords). Since Joe Namath IS selling something, a spiel like his is often what my clients expect. They never see, or hear from, or meet, or are "pitched" by, someone like me -- until a client or contact introduces us. When they realize their good fortune, wow are they pleased! To paraphrase the advertising of a famed, now-deceased (& out of business?) clothier, "an educated beneficiary is my best client".
If I were king, we independent Medicare coverage options brokers (our numbers are not legion, but we exist! Tell our story!) would be regulated like securities brokers - license once, serve clients anywhere; none of this licensing/appointment-across multiple-jurisdictions regulatory thicket. Unfortunately, I am not king - yet.
I write to my Senators and House representative regularly on these issues; they send back well-composed platitudes of concern, but they no doubt have bigger governing fish to fry. Let's face it, the matters someone like me deals with are practically illustrations for the dictionary definition of "first-world problems".
So, hurdles? Nah, life's a bowl of cherries over here - at least, that's what I tell my clients....
I help beneficiaries devise coverage strategies, thinking/talking through what their needs are, what their options are, and what the processes are to evaluate & enroll in coverage that fits them/their spouse/their loved ones. I have never, ever, not ever, enrolled anyone in the course of a single phone call.
I'm a broker. My clients are, as far as I can determine, exclusively referrals. If I have ever "sold" anything, it has been myself, and then only incidentally.
The well-intended regulations CMS announced its intention to implement today may, unintentionally, impact me and my clients adversely. Neither regulators nor executives of bodies that purportedly represent the interests of brokers in such matters seem ever to even imagine that professionals like me actually exist. The proposed regulation's intent notwithstanding, it makes zero sense for insurers to be held responsible for my "marketing" behaviors. While I collaborate with insurers in the sense that my clients may eventually be their policyholders - if the fit is right - I compete with them for my clients' "mindshare" (yechhh, buzzwords). Since Joe Namath IS selling something, a spiel like his is often what my clients expect. They never see, or hear from, or meet, or are "pitched" by, someone like me -- until a client or contact introduces us. When they realize their good fortune, wow are they pleased! To paraphrase the advertising of a famed, now-deceased (& out of business?) clothier, "an educated beneficiary is my best client".
If I were king, we independent Medicare coverage options brokers (our numbers are not legion, but we exist! Tell our story!) would be regulated like securities brokers - license once, serve clients anywhere; none of this licensing/appointment-across multiple-jurisdictions regulatory thicket. Unfortunately, I am not king - yet.
I write to my Senators and House representative regularly on these issues; they send back well-composed platitudes of concern, but they no doubt have bigger governing fish to fry. Let's face it, the matters someone like me deals with are practically illustrations for the dictionary definition of "first-world problems".
So, hurdles? Nah, life's a bowl of cherries over here - at least, that's what I tell my clients....
Last edited:
- 6,458
Caveat, not an agent.
Long time ago you asked me why I continued here and gave me a suggestion for another forum.
One of the answers has now emerged -- priceless information.
In the last two months I have learned:
If I want to consider an MA plan, I should look for one with free brushes.
and
I could look for an agent that holds pajama parties for Medicare educational events.
I am now a better informed Medicare consumer!
Say - this isn't the right thread to post this in, but since I brought the regs up in a previous post, I thought I'd mention that in the Federal Register document referenced in the reg activity CMS announced today, I found this, starting on page 253 of the 900+ page(!) document:
Currently in §§ 422.2274(g)(2)(ii) and 423.2274(g)(2)(ii), TPMOs must record all calls with beneficiaries. This regulation was put into effect to ensure that TPMOs, including agents and brokers, were appropriately marketing to beneficiaries. As stated above, CMS’s experience with reviewing complaints and in listening to recorded calls revealed many instances where agents and brokers have failed to provide enough information, confused beneficiaries, and, most concerning, provided inaccurate information about plan benefits. In other cases, these entities led beneficiaries to believe the beneficiaries were calling Medicare rather than an insurance agent. This requirement for recording all calls with beneficiaries was proposed on January 6, 2022, and finalized in the May 2022 final rule; we had received few pertinent comments prior to the rule being finalized. However, following this rule, CMS has heard from trade organizations, plans, as well as individual agents regarding the obligation to record all calls. Many of these post-final rule questions and comments centered around whether “smaller” agent companies had to record conversations. Some of the comments received after the final rule requested clarification on whether all calls really needed to be recorded. CMS is not proposing to change the requirement that TPMOs, including agents and brokers, regardless of their size, must record calls. However, we are proposing to limit calls that must be recorded from all calls to only those calls regarding sales, marketing, and enrollment.
CMS believes the current requirement is too broad because under the current requirement calls placed to merely set up an in-person meeting, make sure the beneficiary received the plan welcome packet, or ask non-marketing questions, such as when the plan will be effective, must all be recorded. We believe this is an unnecessary burden since our goal is to obtain call recordings to ensure the marketing, sales, and enrollment activities conducted by agents, brokers and TPMOs meet the applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, we are proposing to modify §§ 422.2274(g)(2)(ii) and 423.2274(g)(2)(ii) to limit the calls that must be recorded to the complete duration of marketing, sales, and enrollment calls. The definition of marketing in §§ 422.2260 and 423.2260 will apply to new paragraph (g)(2)(ii) and we intend the words “sales” and “enrollment” to include the plain meaning of those terms.
I am not a regulator or a lawyer, but what I glean from what little the internets yield on the plain meaning of "plain meaning", the term is...not especially plain, but quite roomy ....
CMS believes the current requirement is too broad because under the current requirement calls placed to merely set up an in-person meeting, make sure the beneficiary received the plan welcome packet, or ask non-marketing questions, such as when the plan will be effective, must all be recorded. We believe this is an unnecessary burden since our goal is to obtain call recordings to ensure the marketing, sales, and enrollment activities conducted by agents, brokers and TPMOs meet the applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, we are proposing to modify §§ 422.2274(g)(2)(ii) and 423.2274(g)(2)(ii) to limit the calls that must be recorded to the complete duration of marketing, sales, and enrollment calls. The definition of marketing in §§ 422.2260 and 423.2260 will apply to new paragraph (g)(2)(ii) and we intend the words “sales” and “enrollment” to include the plain meaning of those terms.
I am not a regulator or a lawyer, but what I glean from what little the internets yield on the plain meaning of "plain meaning", the term is...not especially plain, but quite roomy ....
Correct but I got 6 fig renewals starting in Jan after only 2 yrs of work . So yeah a lot of work but Ive been able to garner some loyalty . My retention has been very good but it’s taken a lot of effort .With seps left and right from Hurricanes to pediatric respiratory ailment in organ nobody’s locked in . Plus anyone cam move till March 31 anyway . So no matter what theres 6 month window
I need a scope before presenting a plan, so no. I don't usually get a scope before need analysis is done (list of docs, list of Rxs, general filtering of plans).
It's not a "sales appointment" until I know what I'm selling.
Plus, no one cares anyway if I get the scope at the 3 minute mark or the 12 minute mark of the call.
