ILNews

Many small firms to opt out of health benefits in 2015

J.K. Wall
January 20, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Brian Adams had made up his mind. He was going to stop providing health insurance to his 15 employees at Indianapolis-based Godby Hearth & Home.

Then in October, Adams decided to renew his group health plan early, extending coverage until Oct. 31, 2014.

After that, however, he plans to work with his employees to help them buy insurance through the Obamacare exchanges.

Many employers with fewer than 50 workers followed Adams’ lead last year. They kept their health plans for 2014, but a growing number say they’ll drop group coverage at the end of this year.

“It’s very hard for a small-business owner to deal with this. It is very complex,” Adams said. “And it is dealing with what is probably the most crucial benefit that an employee can have.”

Things were already trending this way before Obamacare, known officially as the Affordable Care Act.

The percentage of employers with 50 or fewer workers offering health benefits in Indiana declined from 44 percent in 2000 to just 29 percent in 2011, according to a study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Nationally, the percentage of small firms offering health benefits dropped 10 points, according to both the RWJF study and an annual employer survey by Kaiser Family Foundation.

Obamacare does not require that small employers offer health benefits, as the law does for employers with 50 or more workers. But the law does encourage them to do so by offering sizable tax credits to offset the cost of health benefits.

If Obamacare does induce small employers to rush to end their health benefits, it will be both good news and bad news for the effectiveness of the law.

On one hand, it shows that Obamacare’s overhaul of the individual insurance market has made that market a far more attractive option, by guaranteeing coverage even for unhealthy consumers and offering individual tax subsidies to lower the cost of insurance. That is allowing some businesses to pursue what they call “an individual strategy” of helping their employees obtain health insurance, but not actually buying it for them.

 On the other hand, Adams and other small-business owners are considering an end to their group benefits because they expect other provisions of Obamacare to send their group plan premiums skyrocketing at the end of 2014.

“My hands are going to be forced,” said Adams, who was an accountant before buying the Godby business. “Once this thing settles through, our group rates will jump to the point where we will not be able to sustain it.”

Community rating

Health insurers such as Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield and UnitedHealthcare have told small-business owners that they face premium increases of 50 percent, 60 percent, 80 percent and sometimes even 100 percent at the end of 2014.

Those predictions were given to employer clients to induce them to renew their current plans early—before the Obamacare rules kicked in Jan. 1, but business owners and insurance brokers take them seriously.

Obamacare will increase insurance rates for many employers because it will not allow health insurers to charge their oldest customers any more than three times as much in premiums as they charge their youngest customers. Previously in Indiana, the oldest customers paid six or seven times more than the youngest.

The new rules, called community rating, mean that companies with younger-than-average workers will face a big increase in insurance rates. For businesses with older-than-average workers, the new rules will probably lead to lower health insurance premiums.

Those rules apply only to individual insurance customers and employers with fewer than 50 workers.

The Indiana Department of Insurance predicted that small employers’ health insurance premiums would rise 8 percent on average this year due to Obamacare. But for all companies with younger-than-average workers, the new rules mean they’ll be paying more.

“I can’t absorb a 60-percent increase. It’s a complete deal-breaker,” said Mike Hutson, owner of Westfield Lighting Co.

He received a projected premium increase from UnitedHealthcare of 60 percent for the end of 2014, which would mean he would pay $50,000 more per year for health benefits for his 17 workers.

He currently pays nearly $5,000 per worker for health insurance, which is a bit lower than national norms.

So instead, Hutson switched his health plan to Anthem on Dec. 1, paying just 6 percent more than he did the year before. That Anthem policy, since it was sold in 2013, does not have to comply with Obamacare’s new community rating rules. But come Dec. 1, 2014, it will, which will likely send Westfield Lighting’s premiums soaring.

At that point, Hutson said, he’s almost certain to send his employees to the Obamacare exchanges. He doesn’t expect to be alone.

“I believe that most small businesses, eventually, will punt,” Hutson said. “I think there will be a tidal wave of this.”

Half could drop coverage

Health insurance consultants who work with small employers agree.

Matt Kleymeyer at Bernard Health, a health benefits consulting firm for individuals and small employers, said he has worked with 40 companies that plan to drop their group health plans, but only four of those did so on Jan. 1.

“If you’re going to be faced with a 50-[percent] or 60-percent increase, you may not have an option to keep a group plan,” Kleymeyer said. “Groups need to be aware of this. They need to start communicating to employees early. They need to think about a reimbursement program. And they need to take time to roll it out.”

The main thing that kept Adams, who is one of Kleymeyer’s clients, from dropping Godby’s health benefits was that the majority of his employees would have paid more for health insurance in 2014 on the Obamacare exchanges than in Godby’s group health plan.

But if premiums spike at the end of this year, as Adams expects, the exchanges will become the most attractive option.

Tony Nefouse, a health insurance broker for individuals and small businesses at Indianapolis-based Nefouse & Associates, is also seeing small employers end their group health benefits.

“I’m chopping up groups left and right,” Nefouse said in late 2013, noting that about half his clients with fewer than 50 workers have either already dropped coverage or have decided to drop it at the end of this year.

It’s firms with fewer than 30 workers that are most likely to end group coverage now, Nefouse said. And among firms with fewer than 10 workers, about 80 percent are working to drop coverage.

Employers with lower-wage workers, or that have had low participation rates in their group health plans, are most likely to drop coverage, Nefouse added.

“With skyrocketing premiums over the years, you have employers who feel like their profits are all going to health insurance premiums,” Nefouse wrote in an email.

 But more could add coverage

Certainly not all small employers are talking about ending health benefits. Some are even adding them, as Obamacare encourages them to do.

Indianapolis-based Sun King Brewing Co. decided to add health insurance for the first time, starting on Jan. 1. That was partly because the company expected to exceed 50 employees by the end of 2013 and partly because its owners felt it was the right thing to do.

“Since we founded the company, we planned to offer health insurance, as soon as we could afford it,” said Sun King President Omar Robinson.

In fact, several national studies have concluded that Obamacare will lead to a slight increase in the number of firms offering coverage.

For example, survey data collected by the National Federation of Independent Businesses last fall found that 13 percent of employers with 50 or fewer workers planned to add coverage in 2014 — wice as many as planned to drop it.

Also, a simulation conducted in early 2013 by California-based RAND Corp. found a slight increase in small firms offering insurance by 2016. Small-business coverage will decrease in some states, Rand’s model found. But in either case, the change will be modest, with increases topping out at 5 percent and decreases bottoming at 2 percent.

Obamacare tries to encourage the smallest employers — those with fewer than 25 workers — to continue offering health benefits by allowing them to deduct as much as 50 percent of their health insurance premium contributions from their 2014 corporate income taxes.

Obamacare, since it was passed in 2010, has allowed small businesses to claim a tax credit equal to 35 percent of the money they spend on employee health benefits. But few small businesses have taken advantage of it, according to a 2012 report by the Government Accountability Office.

That’s surprising because so many employers could qualify for the credits, according to data crunched by two liberal health insurance advocacy groups, the Small Business Majority and Families USA.

In Indiana, an estimated 61,410 employers, or 71 percent of all firms with fewer than 25 workers, would qualify for a tax credit, which would average $857 per worker.

Westfield Lighting is one of the companies claiming the credit in Indiana. But Hutson said the tax credit won’t stop him from dropping his group health plan next year.

“While it helps, it is still a cash-flow killer,” he said in an email. “I have to put up the money and then wait for the benevolence of our ‘statesmen’ in Washington to give it back at the end of the year. No thanks.”

Also, a lot of small employers don’t qualify for tax credits. Adams at Godby Hearth & Home, for example, said his employees on average earn more than $50,000, making his firm ineligible for the credits.

Instead of paying for health insurance directly for 2015, Adams said, he will pay Bernard Health to guide his employees through the maze of choices and incentives that now exist for buying health benefits individually. Adams will also contribute what he was paying before for group coverage to subsidize his employees’ insurance purchases.

“It is really taking this responsibility of insurance out of the business owner’s hand and putting it into the individual’s,” he said. “The old system clearly was going down, heading toward a cliff, anyway. I think the simple point of empowering people to take control of their own destiny for health care is a good thing.”•
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Applause, applause, applause ..... but, is this duty to serve the constitutional order not much more incumbent upon the State, whose only aim is to be pure and unadulterated justice, than defense counsel, who is also charged with gaining a result for a client? I agree both are responsible, but it seems to me that the government attorneys bear a burden much heavier than defense counsel .... "“I note, much as we did in Mechling v. State, 16 N.E.3d 1015 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied, that the attorneys representing the State and the defendant are both officers of the court and have a responsibility to correct any obvious errors at the time they are committed."

  2. Do I have to hire an attorney to get co-guardianship of my brother? My father has guardianship and my older sister was his co-guardian until this Dec 2014 when she passed and my father was me to go on as the co-guardian, but funds are limit and we need to get this process taken care of quickly as our fathers health isn't the greatest. So please advise me if there is anyway to do this our self or if it requires a lawyer? Thank you

  3. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  4. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  5. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

ADVERTISEMENT