Thinking Outside the Box (12): The Benefits of Increased Transparency in Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance for the 180 Million Insured

R. Herzlinger, Barak D Richman
{"title":"Thinking Outside the Box (12): The Benefits of Increased Transparency in Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance for the 180 Million Insured","authors":"R. Herzlinger, Barak D Richman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3498366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Economists have long noted that the tax exclusion of employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) caused workers to purchase health plans that differ in price and other characteristics from those they would otherwise choose for themselves. We explore the short-term and long-term benefits of giving workers better control over ESI funds. \n \nTo measure near-term benefits, we execute a simulation in which employees in large group plans capitalize on a new opportunity to use tax-advantaged Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRAs) to control the full ESI contribution. Employees would deduct for income tax purposes the amount used for health insurance and, if they spend less than the amount of their ESI funds, take the remainder as taxed income. Our calculations adjust for adverse selection by providing a cross-subsidization holdback from the ESI funds. We find that employees increase annual after-tax household income between $101–$252 billion and that federal income tax revenues would increase by $39–$163 billion. Lower- and middle-income households gain proportionately more income. Long-term benefits include the increased take-up of new policies that reduce net spending, spillover benefits to governmental health care programs, and innovative educational and navigational services. We compares these results to those in nations with similar consumer–driven health care systems. \n \nThe U.S. results rest on offering workers HRAs newly integrated with health plans, adequate plan choice, and transparency about plan actuarial values and ESI contributions. Our policy recommendations include expanded transparency in Box 12 of IRS Form W-2, currently the only required source of employee information about their ESI.","PeriodicalId":330166,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3498366","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Economists have long noted that the tax exclusion of employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) caused workers to purchase health plans that differ in price and other characteristics from those they would otherwise choose for themselves. We explore the short-term and long-term benefits of giving workers better control over ESI funds. To measure near-term benefits, we execute a simulation in which employees in large group plans capitalize on a new opportunity to use tax-advantaged Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRAs) to control the full ESI contribution. Employees would deduct for income tax purposes the amount used for health insurance and, if they spend less than the amount of their ESI funds, take the remainder as taxed income. Our calculations adjust for adverse selection by providing a cross-subsidization holdback from the ESI funds. We find that employees increase annual after-tax household income between $101–$252 billion and that federal income tax revenues would increase by $39–$163 billion. Lower- and middle-income households gain proportionately more income. Long-term benefits include the increased take-up of new policies that reduce net spending, spillover benefits to governmental health care programs, and innovative educational and navigational services. We compares these results to those in nations with similar consumer–driven health care systems. The U.S. results rest on offering workers HRAs newly integrated with health plans, adequate plan choice, and transparency about plan actuarial values and ESI contributions. Our policy recommendations include expanded transparency in Box 12 of IRS Form W-2, currently the only required source of employee information about their ESI.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跳出框框思考(12):为1.8亿被保险人增加雇主赞助的医疗保险透明度的好处
经济学家早就注意到,雇主赞助保险(ESI)的税收减免导致工人购买的健康计划在价格和其他特征上与他们自己选择的计划不同。我们探讨了让员工更好地控制ESI资金的短期和长期效益。为了衡量短期利益,我们执行了一个模拟,在这个模拟中,大型集团计划中的员工利用一个新的机会,使用税收优惠的健康报销安排(HRAs)来控制全部ESI贡献。雇员将扣除用于健康保险的金额作为所得税,如果他们的支出少于ESI基金的金额,则将剩余部分作为纳税收入。我们的计算通过提供ESI基金的交叉补贴阻力来调整逆向选择。我们发现,雇员每年使家庭税后收入增加1020亿至2520亿美元,联邦所得税收入将增加390亿至1630亿美元。中低收入家庭的收入相应增加。长期利益包括更多地采用减少净支出的新政策,对政府医疗保健计划的溢出效益,以及创新的教育和导航服务。我们将这些结果与拥有类似消费者驱动型医疗体系的国家进行了比较。美国的结果取决于为员工提供与健康计划新整合的人力资源评估,充分的计划选择,以及计划精算值和ESI贡献的透明度。我们的政策建议包括扩大美国国税局W-2表格第12栏的透明度,这是目前唯一需要的员工ESI信息来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Misdirected Recipients of Tax Reform: Section 199A, its True Beneficiaries, and Application to Low- and Middle- Income Residents Consistent Taxation in a Cashless Society Is It Time to Eliminate Federal Corporate Income Taxes? Brief of Amici Curiae Former Government Officials in Support of Respondents, CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service Allocating COVID-19 State Aid Equitably – The Case of Denmark
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1