Premium subsidies for health insurance: excessive coverage vs. adverse selection (original) (raw)
Related papers
Journal of Health Economics, 2000
A competitive market for individual health insurance tends to risk-adjusted premiums. Premium rate restrictions are often considered a tool to increase access to coverage for high-risk individuals in such a market. However, such regulation induces selection which may have several adverse effects. As an alternative approach we consider risk-adjusted premium subsidies. Empirical results of simulated premium models and subsidy formulae are presented. It is shown that sufficiently adjusted subsidies eliminate the need for premium rate restrictions and consequently avoid their adverse effects. Therefore, the subsidy approach is the preferred strategy to increase access to coverage for high-risk individuals. q
Adverse selection and moral hazard in health insurance
In this paper, we want to characterize the optimal health insurance contract with adverse selection and moral hazard. We assume that policyholders di¤er by the permanent health status loss and choose an unobservable preventive e¤ort in order to reduce the probability of illness which is ex-ante identical. The di¤erence in illness'after-e¤ect modi…es policyholders' preventive actions. By the way, they di¤er in probabilities of illness leading to a situation close to Rothschild and Stiglitz 'model. In this case, we show that the optimal contract exhibits a deductible for the high health risk type since a higher after e¤ect implies a higher preventive e¤ort and then a lower probability of illness rather than for the low health risk type.
Market Inefficiency, Insurance Mandate and Welfare: US Health Care Reform 2010
Discussion Papers, 2010
In this paper we develop a stochastic dynamic general equilibrium overlapping generations (OLG) model with endogenous health capital to study the macroeconomic effects of the Affordable Care Act of March 2010 also known as the Obama health care reform. We find that the insurance mandate enforced with fines and premium subsidies successfully reduces adverse selection in private health insurance markets and subsequently leads to almost universal coverage of the working age population. On the other hand, spending on health care services increases by almost 6 percent due to moral hazard of the newly insured. This increase in health spending is partly financed by the larger pool of insured individuals and by government spending. In order to finance the subsidies the government needs to either introduce a 2.7 percent payroll tax on individuals with incomes over $200, 000, increase the consumption tax rate by about 1.1 percent, or cut government spending about 1 percent of GDP. A stable outcome across all simulated policies is that the reform triggers increases in health capital, decreases in labor supply, and decreases in the capital stock due to crowding out effects and tax distortions. As a consequence steady state output decreases by up to 2 percent. Overall, we find that the reform is socially beneficial as welfare gains are observed for most generations along the transition path to the new long run equilibrium. Finally, we show that the insurance take-up rate is mainly driven by the tax penalty and that the premium subsidies have only a moderate effect on enforcing the mandate.
2011
In this paper we develop a stochastic dynamic general equilibrium overlapping generations (OLG) model with endogenous health capital to study the macroeconomic effects of the Affordable Care Act of March 2010 also known as the Obama health care reform. We find that the insurance mandate enforced with fines and premium subsidies successfully reduces adverse selection in private health insurance markets and subsequently leads to almost universal coverage of the working age population. On other hand, spending on health care services increases by almost 6 percent due to moral hazard of the newly insured. Notably, this increase in health spending is partly financed by the larger pool of insured individuals and by government spending. In order to finance the subsidies the government needs to either introduce a 2.7 percent payroll tax on individuals with incomes over $200, 000, increase the consumption tax rate by about 1.1 percent, or cut government spending about 1 percent of GDP. A stable outcome across all simulated policies is that the reform triggers increases in health capital, decreases in labor supply, and decreases in the capital stock due to crowding out effects and tax distortions. As a consequence steady state output decreases by up to 2 percent. Overall, we find that the reform is socially beneficial as welfare gains are observed for most generations along the transition path to the new long run equilibrium.
Who Took out Additional Supplementary Health Insurance? A dynamic Analysis of Adverse-Selection
I n s t i t u t e f o r R e s e a r c h a n d I n f o r m a t i o n i n H e a l t h E c o n o m i c s no 150-January 2010 According to economic theory, individuals choose their insurance cover levels in virtue of anticipated health expenditures. Thus, they partially reveal their health risks. Yet, on the French health insurance market this hypothesis, known as 'adverse-selection', has only been tested on the supplementary health insurance purchase decision. However, the supplementary health insurance market is extremely heterogeneous, at least in the same way as beneficiaries' health risk levels. Between July 1st 2003 and December 31st 2006, a mutual insurance fund for state employees (Mutuelle générale de l'équipement et des territoires) offered existing holders of its supplementary cover ('MGET basic') an additional health coverage ('MGET+'). This particular context, where individuals covered from the same supplementary health insurance decide to pu...
Employment and Adverse Selection in Health Insurance
2006
We construct and test a new model of employer-provided health insurance provision in the presence of adverse selection in the health insurance market. In our model, employers cannot observe the health of their employees, but can decide whether to offer insurance. Employees sort themselves among employers who do and do not offer insurance on the basis of their current health status and the probability distribution over future health status changes. We show that there exists a pooling equilibrium in which both sick and healthy employees are covered as long as the costs of job switching are higher than the persistence of health status. We test and verify some of the key implications of our model using data from the Current Population Survey, linked to information provided by the U.S. Department of Labor about the job-specific human capital requirements of jobs.
U.S. tax policy and health insurance demand: Can a regressive policy improve welfare?
Journal of Monetary Economics, 2009
The U.S. tax policy on health insurance is regressive because it favors only those offered group insurance through their employers, who tend to have a relatively high income. Moreover, the subsidy takes the form of deductions from the progressive income tax system, giving high-income earners a larger subsidy. To understand the effects of the policy, we construct a dynamic general equilibrium model with heterogenous agents and an endogenous demand for health insurance. We use the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to calibrate the process for income, health expenditures, and health insurance offer status through employers and succeed in matching the pattern of insurance demand as observed in the data. We find that despite the regressiveness of the current policy, a complete removal of the subsidy would result in a partial collapse of the group insurance market, a significant reduction in the insurance coverage, and a reduction in welfare coverage. There is, however, room for raising the coverage and significantly improving welfare by extending a refundable credit to the individual insurance market.
The distortionary effect of health insurance on health demand
2007
This paper presents a general framework for modeling the impact of insurance on healthcare demand extending some of the results of the two-risk model of Rothschild and Stiglitz (1976), but including the latter as a special case. Rothschild and Stiglitz's approach assumes equivalence between the price of treatment and the discomfort caused by the disease. Relaxing this assumption turns out to be key in understanding participation in the insurance and healthcare markets. The demands for insurance and healthcare are modeled simultaneously, under symmetric and asymmetric information. Four main results arise from the relaxation of this assumption. First, only the presence of an insurance market can produce healthcare consumption at higher prices than the discomfort. Second, adverse selection may lead healthcare to be sold at a price lower than that under perfect information. Third, the potential non-participation of one type risk arises despite competition, depending on the degree o...
Public Health Insurance with Monopolistically Competitive Providers and Optional Spot Sales
The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy
We study the implications of extending public-insurance coverage over differentiated medical products of the same therapeutic group to market outcomes. The public insurer can set the reimbursement level for medical providers and the copayment for the insured for medical care provided under the policy coverage, but cannot directly control providers’ spot sales (outside of insurance) price. In this setup, the price offered by the public insurer to medical providers must maintain their reservation profit from selling on the spot market directly to consumers. We show that the public insurer can manipulate this reservation profit by setting the copayment rate, and thereby promote market welfare while increasing consumers’ surplus due to lower medical prices and lower market entry. The results survive generalizations including moral hazard and incomplete insurance coverage.