- 14,809
Gear up for the latest offense on health carriers: rate increases. A portion of the money states have received (for states that accepted the money) goes to rate increase studies.
South Carolina seems to be the first state to start using their portion of the money for this purpose:
State website to monitor health insurance increases | GoUpstate.com
PPACA states that all participating states must assess the rate increase history of each carrier to determine a possible patter of abuse. If the state deems that past rate increases have been abusive, they can block that carrier from participating in the pool.
Coming soon, all carriers must post their rate increase history on their website "prominently." That means, not buried in their TOS in small print. SC will be putting up a site with rate increase information.
This isn't necessarily bad. While just posting raw data can be confusing, there are indeed carriers in the past who have "low-balled" initial rates, then impose 20% to 30% annual increases.
Clients have a right to see a carrier's past history of increases since it can indeed show an abusive history. However, that data needs to be explained and put in perspective.
Imagine, for example, if mutual fund companies didn't post their past return history. While past results are not an indicator of future returns, would you want to know if a certain fund earned negative returns for the past 12 years?
South Carolina seems to be the first state to start using their portion of the money for this purpose:
State website to monitor health insurance increases | GoUpstate.com
PPACA states that all participating states must assess the rate increase history of each carrier to determine a possible patter of abuse. If the state deems that past rate increases have been abusive, they can block that carrier from participating in the pool.
Coming soon, all carriers must post their rate increase history on their website "prominently." That means, not buried in their TOS in small print. SC will be putting up a site with rate increase information.
This isn't necessarily bad. While just posting raw data can be confusing, there are indeed carriers in the past who have "low-balled" initial rates, then impose 20% to 30% annual increases.
Clients have a right to see a carrier's past history of increases since it can indeed show an abusive history. However, that data needs to be explained and put in perspective.
Imagine, for example, if mutual fund companies didn't post their past return history. While past results are not an indicator of future returns, would you want to know if a certain fund earned negative returns for the past 12 years?
Last edited:
