The Kaiser Family Foundation held a media-only conference call with key experts on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), state marketplaces and more to explain the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the King v. Burwell case and to answer questions about its implications. The petitioners in the case are challenging the legality of premium and cost-sharing subsidies for low- and middle-income people buying health plans in 34 states where the federal government rather than the state is operating an insurance marketplace established by the Affordable Care Act.
Private InsuranceSee more about Private Insurance
- state & global data
- view as grid
- view as list
With the Supreme Court ruling on King v. Burwell upholding the Affordable Care Act’s federal subsidies, Drew Altman’s column in The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank explores what the decision means and what’s next for the health law.
A Kaiser Family Foundation analysis of Affordable Care Act (ACA) plans in major metropolitan areas in 11 states where data are available, including the District of Columbia, finds that preliminary 2016 premiums for benchmark silver plans grew modestly, but increased more sharply this year than last year. The average increase for benchmark plans across the cities is 4.4 percent for 2016 compared with a 2 percent increase nationwide in 2015.
Analysis of 2016 Premium Changes and Insurer Participation in the Affordable Care Act’s Health Insurance Marketplaces
This analysis provides an early look at premium changes for individuals in the health insurance marketplaces, created under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), in major cities in 10 states plus DC. Premium changes for the benchmark silver plans vary significantly across the sample cities. The benchmark rates will increase 4.4 percent on average in 2016 without accounting for tax credits, a relatively modest amount but greater than the average increase for 2015.
Data Note: Predictors Of Positive And Negative Attitudes Towards The ACA Among Non-Group Insurance Enrollees
One of the groups perhaps most affected by changes brought about by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are people who purchase their own health insurance in the non-group market. In this Data Note, we examine data from the Kaiser Family Foundation Wave 2 Survey of Non-Group Health Insurance Enrollees to explore the characteristics of non-group enrollees that are associated with positive and negative attitudes towards the ACA, including feeling personally benefited or negatively affected by the law.
This report is based on based on focus group discussions with parents with moderate incomes enrolled in private coverage (employer sponsored or Marketplace) who had children in public coverage (primarily CHIP) or children with private coverage. This report is based on 14 focus group discussions conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and John Snow, Inc. in six cities during February and March 2015. Sites included Birmingham, AL, Chicago, IL, Denver, CO, Philadelphia, PA, and Tampa, FL. Each of these states operate separate CHIP programs. An additional 4 focus groups were conducted in Los Angeles, CA (two in English and two in Spanish). The purpose of the groups was to gain insight into what low and middle-income families value in their children’s coverage, their experiences with CHIP and private insurance, and on parents’ perspectives on the future of CHIP. The information gathered can help inform policy questions such as would private coverage (either employer sponsored coverage or Marketplace) or Medicaid work for children who currently are enrolled in CHIP?
Larry Levitt’s March 2015 post explores what could happen if the U.S. Supreme Court rules for the plaintiffs in the King v. Burwell case, the lawsuit that challenges the federal government’s authority to provide financial assistance to people who buy insurance in federally-operated marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act.
New Analysis Details Impact on Residents in Different States If the U.S. Supreme Court Rules for Challengers in King v. Burwell
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this month in the King v. Burwell case that challenges whether low- and moderate-income Americans are eligible for subsidies to help pay for insurance if they live in states where the federal government, rather than the state, established its new insurance marketplace…
A map and table showing the number of people now receiving premium subsidies who would lose them if the Court finds for the challengers; the total amount of federal subsidy dollars; the average subsidy (or average premium tax credit) that subsidized enrollees have qualified for; and the average increase in premiums that subsidized enrollees would face if the subsidies are disallowed.
This analysis tracks the financial performance of insurers in the individual market by evaluating trends in the medical loss ratio (MLR) in the pre-ACA landscape from 2010 to 2013 and estimates the MLR for the first full year of Affordable Care Act implementation in 2014. Findings suggest that although performance varied among insurers, insurers overall had roughly comparable financial performance in 2014 as in recent prior years.