- 19,641
I got that info as well. For me, the commissions in In are $525 1st year and $475 renewals. In Ky, it's $450 1st yr and $300 renewals for PFFS plans. In Tn., the PFFS is the same as Ky except it's $500 1st year and $300 renewals for the SNP.
Still no offical 2009 MA commisions posted
- Thread starter Insuranceman
- Start date
I got that info as well. For me, the commissions in In are $525 1st year and $475 renewals. In Ky, it's $450 1st yr and $300 renewals for PFFS plans. In Tn., the PFFS is the same as Ky except it's $500 1st year and $300 renewals for the SNP.
- 7,066
Most likely I will not receive an e-mail from UHG. In fact, I have not received an e-mail from anyone yet.
Apparently there is some question regarding agents getting paid first year commission when replacing one MA plan with another MA plan. I have to assume that Anthony is more "up to speed" on what is happening than we are, at least I hope so.
He has been involved in meetings where they are trying to figure out exactly what the wording from CMS really means regarding payment of commissions. Apparently it is so ambiguous that the guys who are suppose to know still are not comfortable enough to put it in writing.
One interpretation is that agents, when replacing an MA plan, will not receive any first year commissions. I'm not saying that is gospel but apparently one way of reading what CMS is saying.
I haven't seen it so I don't know. He did read it to me over the phone and I can see how that might be what they are saying.
What a mess. It is a good thing that the enrollment period isn't coming up in a couple of weeks. haha
- 19,641
That is also what I understand the argument/discussion is about. But, if a company pays the same for renewals as for 1st year, it's a moot point.
Gives the beaurecrats something to do, I suppose?
- 1,704
That is also what I understand the argument/discussion is about. But, if a company pays the same for renewals as for 1st year, it's a moot point.
Unless they say that replacements are governed by the first year contract of the initial writing company.
Unless they say that replacements are governed by the first year contract of the initial writing company.
- 19,641
- 1,704
Perhaps i need to clarify that statement. A plan sold in 2007 or 2008 has different renewals than the ones coming up for 2009.
I think on the old ones I may average $8 to $10/mo renewal. That is on the ma and mapd. The pdp is like nothing. And i have a few HMO's who paid a higher commission last year, but no renewals.
So based on that old contract, CMS might say "go ahead and replace with a newer plan, but your renewal is based on that initial sale 2 years ago." Only new sales to a MA/MAPD for 2009 will receive the NEW commission structure. That would squelch any churning.
And i'm sure the look back would only be one year. So if someone had an MA in 2007, then switched to a med supp for 2008, then decided to buy MA for 2009....he would be considered a New sale.
Just musing here.
I think on the old ones I may average $8 to $10/mo renewal. That is on the ma and mapd. The pdp is like nothing. And i have a few HMO's who paid a higher commission last year, but no renewals.
So based on that old contract, CMS might say "go ahead and replace with a newer plan, but your renewal is based on that initial sale 2 years ago." Only new sales to a MA/MAPD for 2009 will receive the NEW commission structure. That would squelch any churning.
And i'm sure the look back would only be one year. So if someone had an MA in 2007, then switched to a med supp for 2008, then decided to buy MA for 2009....he would be considered a New sale.
Just musing here.
- 19,641
OK. I see where you are coming from now. That would suck. I hope that's not what's coming down the pike.
- 7,066
I agree, but that's one of the things Anthony was talking about this morning.
He was told "they" would have it all sorted out this afternoon. Guess what, this afternoon has come and gone.
Hey, you got your 20.
As it is, there will be a frenzy to move all MA's to a different company since the renewals are way higher. If this stands it will make the problem worse than ever before regarding churning. The incentive to churn in the future has been increased because if you move someone from another company, bam....$500.
I appears to me that the companies may have kicked a sleeping dog and the agents will be the ones to get bit. I can't imagine CMS letting this stand.
I appears to me that the companies may have kicked a sleeping dog and the agents will be the ones to get bit. I can't imagine CMS letting this stand.
Similar threads
