(A version of this column was published by
Forbes.)
My previous column suggested the 21st
Century Cures Act, which President Obama signed on December 13, demonstrated
Republicans can lead on health reform. Promoted as a pro-innovation bill, the
new law will improve the Food and Drug Administration’s regulatory processes;
as well as fund Vice-President Biden’s Cancer Moonshot, the National Institutes
of Health, and steps to reduce the opioid epidemic.
However, the final version of the bill
also included an important payment reform, which takes a small but significant
bite out of Obamacare. Tacked onto the end of the bill, section 18001of the 21st
Century Cures Act expands the use of Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRAs)
by small businesses. This is a win for small businesses which were harmed by
Obamacare. Indeed, given the overwhelming bipartisan support for the 21st
Century Cures Act, section 18001 could be defined as Democrat politicians’
first real step towards conceding Obamacare needs to be repealed and replaced.
The advantage of HRAs and similar funding
vehicles is that they allow employers to give money directly to employees,
which they can spend on medical care. This gets around health insurers’
bureaucracies, which add unnecessary administrative costs.
The Affordable Care Act (2010) limited
employers’ use of these funding vehicles. The IRS promulgated rules levying an excise
tax of up to $100 per employee per day.
Although employers of fewer than 50
full-time equivalent employees were supposed to be exempt the employer mandate
to offer so-called “affordable” coverage, this excise tax was effectively a
penalty on small employers which had previously reimbursed employees’ medical
expenses or premiums using HRAs. The 21st Century Cures Act
abolishes this excise tax, restoring a valuable option to small businesses’
menu of benefits.
HRAs stand alongside Health Savings
Accounts (HSAs) as ways to return control of medical spending to individuals.
The primary difference is that an HRA
remains the employer’s property, but an HSA is a bank account owned by the
employee. Although an employer can roll funds over from one year to the next in
an HRA, when the employee leaves, he abandons any remaining balance. For this
and other reasons, HRAs are far from perfect. Nevertheless, they are a move in
the right direction.
Obamacare was designed as a hand-out to
health insurers. It did not quite work out that way. Nevertheless, the law
forces as much health spending as possible through insurers’ claims processing.
Not only does this add bureaucracy, but it inhibits proper price formation
(which in a normal market takes place where the marginal supplier meets the
marginal producer). Instead, health prices are determined
administratively
between insurers, governments, and providers.
Advocates of consumer-driven health care hope
that an ever increasing share of medical payments will be paid by patients
directly to providers. At some point, the insurers’ role in price-fixing will
become so obviously absurd it will fall apart, and prices will be determined in
a more properly functioning market.
The 21st Century Cures Act removes
the Obamacare’s excise tax on small businesses using HRAs to fund employees’
medical spending, instead of overpriced health insurance. As an tax expert notes: “Because of the
ACA, many small employers have been prohibited from using reimbursement
arrangements that previously were long-standing and effective methods of
providing employees with health care benefits. The new law is a welcome
modification to the ACA since it gives small employers excise tax relief plus a
method for providing health benefits to their employees via the QSEHRA
[Qualifying Small Employer HRA].”
Like the HRA itself, the new reform is not
perfect. For employees who are eligible for tax credits in Obamacare’s
exchanges, there is a claw-back of those tax credits if their employers fund
HRAs for them. It is hard to imagine a small business wanting to substitute its
own money for federal taxpayers’ in the exchanges. Therefore, we can expect
only higher-income earning workers (who are ineligible for tax credits in
Obamacare’s exchanges) to take advantage of this new reform.
Nevertheless, this is a small but
significant step towards reducing the control health insurers have over our
medical spending. Hopefully, more such reforms will come in the next Congress.
No comments:
Post a Comment