United Health Care - Opting Out of Most Exchanges!

[MBSC]

Let's use a current example with a family of 4 in FL 33710, Hus and Wife 45, Both NS, Kids M 14 and F 12 at 138% FPL or $33,465. This gives a tax credit of $538 per month for 2016.

Cheapest Silver for 2015 excluding quality of network and so on is FL Blue 1443 @ $657 Before APTC after $ 74.

Now increase that monthly premium before APTC By 30%. What was $ 74 per month now increases to $ 271.10 per month. That's 366% + rate increase to those who are in the 138% FPL or close to 10% of their yearly earnings.

A family of four at 138% FPL ($33,465) has their contribution amount limited to 0.0331 (3.31%) of their MAGI. Their annual contribution amount would be no more than $1,107.69, or $92.31 per month.

The $92.31 contribution amount is compared to the SLCSP and the PTC is the difference. If the lowest cost silver plan increased 30% and the SLCSP experienced no change, their premium would rise from $74 to no more than $92.31 for the lowest silver plan.

If the family selects a plan more expensive than the SLCSP, the family is responsible for their contribution amount plus the difference between the SLCSP and their plan.

The contribution amount percentages are found in Table 2 of IRS Form 8962 below. The 2015 contribution limit of 9.56% for 300-400% FPL is increased to 9.66% for 2016.

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i8962.pdf

 

[Tkruger]

I appreciate your contribution.

Then I don't understand why we've seen such different results from 14 thru to 16 plan year costs.

In 14 Carrier X there was no costs for the Silver plan.
In 15 Carrier X clients responsibility rose to $ 70 same plan no household change.
In 16 Carrier X clients responsibility rose to $ 130 same plan no household change.

It also leaves me wondering why as Y put it that FL was so vastly different than AZ if the Federal Gov has limits as noted in the IRS document provided in the link.

Anyone?

 

[Yagents]

If the SLCSP is lower than the maximum allowed % of income, then no tax credits are issued. And Vice Versa.

AZ started below, and FL started above the max allowed % of income.

In order to keep your premium at the maximum allowed % or lower, you have to buy the actual SLCSP plan EACH year.

----------

..
..
.
.
.
..
.
And this is the reason why the UHC pullout will hit so many people. Good analysis and charts on the link:

If United were to exit from all areas where it currently participates and not be replaced by a new entrant, the effect on insurer competition could be significant in some markets – particularly in rural areas and southern states. United current participates in 1855 counties, representing 59% of all counties nationwide (and an estimated 71% of marketplace enrollees). We find that in 29% of counties (536 out of 1855 counties) where United participates, its exit would result in a drop from two insurers to one. In another 29% of counties (532) where United currently participates, there would be two exchange insurers as a result of a withdrawal. If United were to leave the exchange market overall, 1.8 million Marketplace enrollees would be left with two insurers, and another 1.1 million would be left with one insurer as a result of the withdrawal.

Analysis of UnitedHealth Group

 

[Ann H]

The SLCSP is a moving target. Until you know that number, you don't know how the rate increases will impact subsidized clients.

In FL, Kruger is correct, APTC started high and has stayed level over 3 years.
In AZ, we were the low, then SLCSP went lower in yr 2, then higher in yr 3 to absorb most of the rate increase in year 3.

I love the famous statement "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice they are not."

Theoretically, anyone buying the SLCSP every year kept the same net premium, adjusted annually by the medical rate of inflation.

In practice, the SLCSP was not always desirable. A lot of subsidized folks still could only afford lower silver or bronze. This caused rate increases to be amplified. In some states, like YAgents so expertly noted, the SLCSP was a terrible plan. Here in AZ, it was an undesirable anorexic HMO network in the red light district of Phoenix.

 

[Yagents]

So, since we are within a few weeks of all filings of rates & plans being due at CMS for 2017, the timing of this release is expected (to coincide with earnings results).

But, With this news coming out so early in the year, it tells me that UHC didn't even bother spending the money to create and file the plans. They checked out months ago.

We may hear of a few more carriers throwing in the towel over the next month in selected states.

After that, we'll have a lull until September when the requested rate increases get denied, and carriers take their ball and go home.

 

[kgmom219]

Couldn't be happier....

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/04/19/unitedhealthcare-drops-obamacare-plans-texas/

 

[AllenChicago]

Couldn't be happier....

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/04/19/unitedhealthcare-drops-obamacare-plans-texas/

Was United Healthcare reasonably priced in Texas? I love their huge PPO network, but the premiums are sky-high here in Illinois.

I don't think UHC will be paying 2017 commissions in the states where they choose to stay. They've probably dumped the commission software to the archive storage (ie. virtual trashcan) already.

 

[insurance5511]

only a matter of time until all the carriers do this...I didn't want to believe it, but it's now a reality...Indy health plans are done

 

[AllenChicago]

It's interesting that this thread's title is accurate for both 2013 and 2017.

 

[Ann H]

And, UHC left Arizona too. They were actually well priced here, although their PPO/HMO/Whatever product was a little strange to understand.

The article points out that BCBSAZ is considering exiting some or all counties of AZ too. Guess which 2 carriers were left in AZ's rural areas last year? Yes, BCBSAZ and UHC.

(Credit to Yagents, who pointed out this article to me earlier today).