Post-MLR, Why the Huge Premium Differentials?

jbage007

Guru
100+ Post Club
Can't figure this out.

It's almost Feb. 2011. All of the carriers are under the 80% MLR rule now.

So why the huge discrepancy in premiums from company to company for virtually the same plan designs (at least in many states)?

In California for example, we're seeing the 3 major carriers within a nickel of each other on similar (almost identical) HSA high deductible plans. Even Aetna is right in line *gasp*.

But then you run the numbers with Assurant, Cigna, etc. and WOWZER! Premiums through the roof - double or more the other 3 or 4.

Similar experiences in many other states. In Texas for example, Blue Cross continues to undercut the market.

How can this all be?

In theory, companies with substantially higher premiums are paying out substantially more in benefits. It's all the same, right? You can make the argument to your clients - buy the higher priced plan because you'll get more back (one way or another).

Can anyone explain this phenomenon?
:nah:
 
Most carriers are stupid. A tight MLR has nothing to do with it. Pricing is all about market share and competition.

If the MLR was 10% instead of 20% you would see fewer players and higher prices.

It seems you have been studying from the same book the clowns in DC use.

If you want to make health insurance competitive it has nothing to do with regulating admin costs.
 
Back
Top