Will Divestment from Employment-Based Health Insurance Save Employers Money? The Case of State and Local Governments /

Reforms introduced by the Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act (ACA) build new sources of coverage around employment-based health insurance. But what if firms find it cheaper to have their employees obtain insurance from these sources, even after accounting for penalties (for non-provision of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
1. Verfasser:
Goldhaber-Fiebert, Jeremy D.
Körperschaft:
National Bureau of Economic Research
Weitere Verfasser:
Studdert, David M., Farid, Monica S., Bhattacharya, Jay
Format:
Elektronisch E-Book
Sprache:
Englisch
Veröffentlicht:
Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research 2014.
Zusammenfassung:
Reforms introduced by the Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act (ACA) build new sources of coverage around employment-based health insurance. But what if firms find it cheaper to have their employees obtain insurance from these sources, even after accounting for penalties (for non-provision of insurance) and employee bonuses (to ensure the shift is cost neutral for them)? State and local governments (SLGs) have strong incentives to consider the economics of such "divestment"; many have large unfunded benefits liabilities. We investigated whether SLGs would save under two scenarios: (1) shifting all employees and under-65-retirees to alternative sources of coverage; (2) shifting only employees whose household incomes indicate they would be eligible for federally subsidized coverage and all under-65-retirees. Full divestment would cost SLGs more than they currently pay, due primarily to penalty costs. Selective divestment could save SLGs nearly $129 billion over 10 years at the expense of the federal government.
Umfang:
1 online resource: illustrations (black and white);
Anmerkungen:
June 2014.
Schlagworte: