No the $50 extra in replacements won’t take effect until 2026
-
Do you have any victories you'd like to share for the month of May? Help us celebrate others by posting here.
CVS is willing to dump 10% of its Medicare Advantage members next year
- Thread starter Duaine
- Start date
Special Agent
Super Genius
- 199
What about the bump up in renewals? Do you have a link on this?
I remember when Obamacare came out. I remember carrier meetings, hearsay, the forum, and all kinds of stuff where it was pretty well known that MAPD was on its last leg.
Yeah, then it pretty much started to ramp up.
I don't think that next year will be a slate of plans with $3,000 in dental and free golf WITH $3,250 MOOP. We're not getting that....
But I also don't think we'll go back to only one $0 MAPD in the county with $500 in dental and its an HMO.
They'll trim. But it'll be a haircut, not a buzz.
A buzz - a severe cut in the market - will be when you see big cities (like Columbus OH) back down to one or two $0 options. Back then almost my entire book was on a $19 MAPD because it was a low cost PPO w/ the major hospitals! I just don't think we'll go back to the go-to plans being $20/mo...
The bump in renewals is for 2026 . It’s been discussed on Facebook 50 times . The $100 new to nedicare starts in 2025 . Renewals kick in in 2026
- 1,500
Sort of funny to think the carriers would collectively decide to all go non commissionable, and pocket the extra $100 for PDP's...... CMS looks at them "wait, not like that" since they have given the carriers quite a bit of freedom to "interpret" the final ruling.
My understanding is the carriers are the ones who decide how overrides are paid to the uplines, they get to "interpret" the final ruling.
My understanding is the carriers are the ones who decide how overrides are paid to the uplines, they get to "interpret" the final ruling.
Special Agent
Super Genius
- 199
What FB group have good conversation about this that you recommend? Some of those groups seem a little janky.just FYI i just spoke with a friend who is a manager with UHC captive channel and he said they expect the captive channel to pay 50 more for the replacements and renewals already paying FMV starting 2025
CMS doesn't care about agents and neither do carriers.
If CMS (or any other government agent) has a benevolent motivation it is to take action because they believe it will benefit the consumer.
Scott mentioned Obamacare. That was implemented on the premise that carriers were being using "discriminating" underwriting rules to weed out higher risk applicants. Of course it was also a vote buying scheme that could be pitched as a way to get "free" or low cost health insurance.
Carriers welcomed the change you can believe in because they expected truckloads of new premium dollars and profits because Obamacare forced everyone to have health insurance and it would be delivered to the consumer at a lower cost.
The reality was fewer carriers, less competition, fewer choices for the consumer and higher premiums.
That scenario will most likely repeat if the proposed MAPD changes are enacted.
In the 90's DC noticed that individuals with poor credit were denied home loans and the government was going to do something to correct that inequity. DC wanted to eliminate the sub-prime lending market because it was "discriminatory". The result of mandated changes was a raft of "no doc" loans, also known as "liars loans". Banks and S&L institutions were encouraged to make loans to people with bad credit and there would be no downside risk to them because big government would cover their losses. That created a domino effect that led to bank closures, declining home values and loan write downs.
DC's solution to everything is to correct the wrongs of capitalism in the name of helping the down & out crowd by throwing more taxpayer dollars at the problem to protect the "less fortunate".
Changes in the way MAPD dollars are allocated will not produce the expected results. Some entities in the food chain will be hurt while a few will prosper and ultimately the end consumer will be worse off.
The most feared words in the English language are, "I am from the government and I am here to help you".
Some producers and carriers will benefit by the proposed changes and some will lose. Ultimately the end consumer will be worse off than they were before.
Look to the past if you want to predict the future.
If CMS (or any other government agent) has a benevolent motivation it is to take action because they believe it will benefit the consumer.
Scott mentioned Obamacare. That was implemented on the premise that carriers were being using "discriminating" underwriting rules to weed out higher risk applicants. Of course it was also a vote buying scheme that could be pitched as a way to get "free" or low cost health insurance.
Carriers welcomed the change you can believe in because they expected truckloads of new premium dollars and profits because Obamacare forced everyone to have health insurance and it would be delivered to the consumer at a lower cost.
The reality was fewer carriers, less competition, fewer choices for the consumer and higher premiums.
That scenario will most likely repeat if the proposed MAPD changes are enacted.
In the 90's DC noticed that individuals with poor credit were denied home loans and the government was going to do something to correct that inequity. DC wanted to eliminate the sub-prime lending market because it was "discriminatory". The result of mandated changes was a raft of "no doc" loans, also known as "liars loans". Banks and S&L institutions were encouraged to make loans to people with bad credit and there would be no downside risk to them because big government would cover their losses. That created a domino effect that led to bank closures, declining home values and loan write downs.
DC's solution to everything is to correct the wrongs of capitalism in the name of helping the down & out crowd by throwing more taxpayer dollars at the problem to protect the "less fortunate".
Changes in the way MAPD dollars are allocated will not produce the expected results. Some entities in the food chain will be hurt while a few will prosper and ultimately the end consumer will be worse off.
The most feared words in the English language are, "I am from the government and I am here to help you".
Some producers and carriers will benefit by the proposed changes and some will lose. Ultimately the end consumer will be worse off than they were before.
Look to the past if you want to predict the future.
