Let Them Keep Their Plan!

[FLM]

According to everything I've read and been told any health insurance written after March 23, 2010 will be terminated on the anniversary date of the policy in 2014, to be replaced by an exchange plan or a penalty will be paid.

It is also my understanding that insurance companies will not be able to continue offering these plans to existing subscribers past those dates.

This makes absolutely no sense, whatsover.

Plans written after March 23, 2010 are, for the most part, compliant with PPACA (at least the elements put into effect immediately) and are far better than all of the grandfathered plans that have seen premiums skyrocket in the past two years.

They are also far less expensive than the exchange plans that will arrive in 2014.

If the next president (whoever is elected) wants to do the right thing there will be an announcement that anyone who has a health insurance plan, either grandfathered or written post-PPACA (and compliant) can either keep their plan in 2014 or switch to an exchange plan.

If they want to make it even better, give consumers the right to purchase one of these plans in 2013 and keep it as long as they want.

Of course, this makes way too much sense for it to happen, unfortunately.

 

[HealthGuy]

Anyone else agree with this interpretation of the law? If its true there goes our recent renewal commissions! This business is fun isnt it?

 

[Yagents]

Post ppaca plans will be required to upgrade to OOP limits, GI issue, and added maternity and EHB's. But not one carrier I've asked has any idea if this is true or if it will happen as there has been no guidance yet from HHS.

If what I say is true, that person will either keep the plan (no subsidies avial), or buy a new exchange plan with subsidies,

 

[russelltw]

One of my carriers told me recently they have the option to not offer grandfathered plans and cancel all GF plans after 2014. They said the reason would be having to keep two computer systems going (one GF and the other Exchange). They said if there are few GF plans, they may drop all GF plans at that point instead of running two systems.

 

[ABC]

Post PPAC plans may not meet be deemed QHP. Thus if someone kept that plan they could be subject to the tax penalty.

I also have heard that some carriers will not run both non and grandfathered plans. That they will only have NON.

Either way, its going to take a couple of years after 2014 to get everyone on one page.

 

[Yagents]

What happens to the guaranteed renewable clause for GF plans? If they don't pull out of the state, they can't terminate the plan.

 

[AllenChicago]

Post ppaca plans will be required to upgrade to OOP limits, GI issue, and added maternity and EHB's. But not one carrier I've asked has any idea if this is true or if it will happen as there has been no guidance yet from HHS.

If what I say is true, that person will either keep the plan (no subsidies avial), or buy a new exchange plan with subsidies,

That makes sense, because thus far, all Maj Med plans effective after 3/23/2010 have had to keep up with the HHS benefit mandates. New mandates from HHS in 2013 and 2014 will also have to be added to existing plans.

Sounds like a good opportunity for agents who live in a state that allows you to charge a consulting fee. Help the client decide between:
1. Exchange plan with subsidies
2. Keep existing plan, without subsidies
3. Purchase a NMM (Near Major Medical) policy.

Option 3 will be the least costly, yet generate the highest compensation. It will also be the best overall choice for middle and upper income clients, from what I'm hearing.
-ac

 

[FLM]

That makes sense, because thus far, all Maj Med plans effective after 3/23/2010 have had to keep up with the HHS benefit mandates. New mandates from HHS in 2013 and 2014 will also have to be added to existing plans.

Sounds like a good opportunity for agents who live in a state that allows you to charge a consulting fee. Help the client decide between:
1. Exchange plan with subsidies
2. Keep existing plan, without subsidies
3. Purchase a NMM (Near Major Medical) policy.

Option 3 will be the least costly, yet generate the highest compensation. It will also be the best overall choice for middle and upper income clients, from what I'm hearing.
-ac

I don't need a consulting fee to help clients make the right choice, particularly if agents are compensated for exchange plans or, if the client can keep their existing plan without a subsidy, collect a renewal commission that will most likely go on for many years.

As for NMM plans, if that is a good choice for clients, I will also be more than pleased to make the old commission level for enrolling them in the best plan available.

I just doubt that this will be the scenario, somehow consumers (and agents) will get shafted in this terrible process.

 

[ABC]

I don't think a consulting fee will work in the individual market.

A very small part of the population values what true professional brings to the table.

If we get fair comp on the exchange then its going to be smooth sailing.

 

[ctg]

Is there a reason to keep a grandfathered plan at this point? A friend/client has a GF plan with BC/BS. A comparable plan with another carrier would save just shy of 2K per year in premium. $100 more deductible, $1600 more OOP max, $30 copay vs 20% co-insurance for office visits for the new plan.

I don't think anyone knows at this point what is going to happen to the old plans, so I can't really advise him on that.

He has a couple issues we would need to make certain are covered with the new plan, mainly hemochromatosis.

Is my reluctance to switch him unfounded?