The Winners & Losers of Healthcare Reform—a Preliminary View

The Winners & Losers of Healthcare Reform—a Preliminary View

With much hand wringing health reform passed.  Greater access to healthcare for all was achieved with the introduction of state health insurance exchanges.

Individuals who had no way to purchase health insurance now could. And we are not talking about emergency care in a hospital setting.  But the other broken areas of the system, out of control costs and a need for improved quality were largely left unaddressed by the legislation.

So while the target is still moving as the details of round one get sorted, who are the anticipated winners and losers?

WINNERS

Sick patients-Coverage will be expanded to millions of people who lack insurance. Not all of them wanted or needed this coverage, but for those who needed it and couldn’t obtain it this change will be a big win. Also the removal of annual and lifetime limits helps this group.  Many of the healthcare system horror stories have focused on this group and the legislation fixes this problem.

Future sick patients—What if I don’t want coverage? Starting in 2014 those who opt not to purchase coverage will be subject to annual fine based on coverage at the end of the prior year. However there is nothing to stop someone from waiting to sign up for coverage until they get sick. No fine and only premiums paid during the months after signing up make this ripe for games like signing up in December to avoid the fine (and likely some scrutiny in the final regulations).

Early retirees—Many under age 65 retirees had been left out in the cold as more of their former employers eliminated early retiree health plans due to cost concerns. The elimination of pre-existing conditions and the ability to purchase coverage is a major help to this population. Medicaid eligibility will be expanded, as well. Subsidies for purchasing care from the exchanges will be available to those making 4 times the poverty level.

Medical schools—The need for doctors just expanded, so while it has always been competitive to get into medical school, the new system will amp this up. The need for more and larger medical schools will increase. Expect to see increased medical school enrollments and an acceleration of new medical schools.

Lawyers—The legislation yielded double bonus for attorneys. The cry for tort reform to decrease the cost of malpractice insurance (and a relief from the defensive medical practices by physicians who order extra tests and provide unnecessary care to cover their behinds) was unheeded. This means lawyers still get to sue and share in not only large judgments but settlements in frivolous suits. In addition this legislation will spawn all kinds of new disputes to litigate. Big winners.

Consultants—Companies are going to be confused and looking for answers. Anyone who can help sort out the mess will benefit from additional business.
Solutions Providers—These specialized experts who can help companies come up with creative ways to offset cost increases in the face of the new order will be winners. Employers will get little help from Washington on cost issues.

Developing a new healthcare strategy with supporting tactics will become paramount. There are many interesting and effective offerings and solutions available on the market in areas such as value-based benefits, data management and analysis, performance standards, wellness, disease and care management, medical record interoperability, virtual care, onsite clinics, and contract management. Look for more innovations to come.

Life Insurance companies—The prospect of higher income taxes makes life insurance an even wiser vehicle for saving in a tax advantaged way. Knowledgeable financial professionals will be advising their clients to find ways to avoid the higher taxes, often through variable annuities and life insurance. Life insurance companies will be more aggressively marketing the tax savings of their products and adding revenue from an aging population.

LOSERS

All taxpayers—Where will the money come from to pay for this? Because the bill focuses on revenue in the early years and pushes out the big spending to later years, the costs have been underestimated. Initial estimates are an incremental 3-5% over healthcare trend over the next 3-5 years. And these are the lower cost years! This will be a huge drain on the treasury and therefore on future taxpayers. The initial tax increases focus on the wealthy, but the wealthy cannot fund this themselves. Get ready for income tax rate increases for most taxpayers and maybe a VAT to offset these costs.

The Middle Class—After the wealth transfer associated with the taxes, the shrinking of the middle class seems inevitable—and not because they are getting wealthier.

Healthy people—Some people really didn’t want health coverage. Now these people will be required to participate or pay a penalty. This is an inevitable result of any broadening of access. The issue is the penalty is really too low to dissuade people from opting out. Look for the penalty for those who can afford it to increase dramatically over time.

The economy—The cost of healthcare, growing budget deficits, and the disincentives for job growth among small businesses give pause for concern over the economy’s growth prospects. The deficit will be a choker for the economy for years to come. The adverse impact on employers (see below) can only hurt the economy too.

Future Members of Congress—The game isn’t over. Future members of Congress will be left holding the bag to clean up the issues caused by the new legislation.

WINNERS/LOSERS

Health Insurance Companies— A dramatic increase in insured Americans could be viewed as good business for health insurance companies. Their administrative capacities are still needed to run the system. However they will inherit a poorer risk pool and mandated coverages making their book of business less profitable. Health insurance companies will be subject to new excise taxes under the rules. As we have already seen in the vilification of the insurance companies in Massachusetts because of higher medical costs, being able to pass on price increases to offset the higher costs will be difficult but it will happen.

Prescription Drug Companies—Simple demographics plus expanded insured populations will expand usage of their drugs tremendously. The additional fees imposed on them starting in 2011 will be offset by their business growth long-term, but the pricing of the product is a big question mark. Cutbacks in reimbursements, as is the case with the health plans, will limit the upside for pharma companies. This uncertainty over pricing and certainty over fees does explain the reduced financial outlooks given by these companies to Wall Street for the next couple of years.

Large Employers—Starting in 2014, any employer with over 50 employees must offer health coverage or will be subject to $166.67 per month penalty per employee (excluding the first 30). Mandates on cost sharing and spending requirements will ensure coverages are credible, plans must have no pre-existing condition exclusions, and maximum 90 day waiting periods. And administering this will be tough, especially in the beginning. So where is the winning status? The penalty is actually so low relative to the cost of coverage that employees would likely opt out of coverage and pay the penalty. Many anticipate the penalties to increase in advance of 2014; expect to see changes as soon as the initial regulations are promulgated on this point to avoid the incentive for employers to drop their plans. And when that happens some employers who paid far less for the benefits of some employees (especially in the hospitality, retail, and staffing industries) will be faced with dramatically constrained margins. These companies will need to increase pricing, amend their business model, or close shop. Even in other industries healthcare costs will continue to erode employer profit margins. On second thought, maybe they are really just losers in this reform.

Small Employers—No employer mandate of coverage exists and there is no consequence for employers with less than 50 full-time employees who don’t offer coverage. Employees will get their coverage from the exchanges. Tax credits will be available to small firms. And some of the fallout from large employer failures may benefit smaller firms. So where is the loser status? There will be a disincentive for the small firms to grow beyond 50 employees.

Over age 65 retirees—In addition to starting to plug the Part D doughnut hole in 2010, starting in 2011 brand name drug discounts will be available to reduce their costs. However Medicare reimbursement rates to providers will fall making it more likely that doctors may choose to stop taking Medicare patients. Finding a doctor with an avalanche of new Medicare eligible participants coming as the baby boomers age will become increasingly difficult. The concern raised prominently during the Bush presidency does not disappear; Medicare funding will run out in the foreseeable future without changes or cutbacks.

Hospitals—Fewer write-offs and higher bed occupancy would be a boon to hospitals, but the reimbursement levels will fall. There will likely be have and have-not facilities depending on their clout over health plans.

Doctors—While consumer demand will increase for care with a rising population, there are too few doctors to provide the care, especially primary care physicians. In addition the new legislation makes it even less attractive for a doctor to enter primary care. Nurse practitioners may fill some of the gap of basic medical services, freeing up doctors to perform more sophisticated care. However lower Medicare reimbursements and nothing done to counteract malpractice rates make this profession a labor of love over economics.

Brokers—If costs are cut and plans are mandated, it is possible that third parties will be looked at as a cost rather than a value-add. With people browsing online for prices and purchasing directly from exchanges, the role of the middleman decreases. There will still be complexity in the purchase process, but look for broker commissions to be less attractive and for the brokers to transform themselves.

Obama—There was a large cost to this fight, he did accomplish his goal of passing this major legislation. This could become his legacy or his downfall. A one-term President? That doesn’t seem so far-fetched.

About The Aothor

Meet Stephen Karp,

President of Karp Solutions

steve@karpsolutions.com

www.karpsolutions.com

Stephen's quarter century of business experience enables him to provide clients with a unique marriage between finance and human resources. As a corporate human resources and finance executive, salesperson, consultant, and employee benefits expert, Stephen has delivered proven results for emerging companies and clients, both large and small.

Stephen's a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and has a MBA in finance from New York University. Stephen has gained the reputation as a strategic thinker, creative problem solver, and innovative human resources expert. He's insightful and ethical, qualities that make him an effective leader and consultant. As a result, he has become a trusted advisor and "go to" resource for his clients.