He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it. — Martin Luther King Jr, 1958

Signs ObamaCare May Quash Self-Insurance for Small Businesses

June 8, 2012   ·   By   ·   0 Comments

By John Vinci
Americans for Limited Government

Imagine that, in order to increase competition among grocery stores, the government created local farmers’ markets all across the country.  Anyone could sell food within these farmers’ markets — including the grocery stores.  But when the grocery stores refused to participate, the government enacted regulations to force them to do so. Thus, what was meant to encourage competition instead became the means of suppressing it.

Similarly, the Obama Administration has signaled that it may create new regulations in order to protect Obamacare’s online health insurance marketplaces called Health Insurance Exchanges. Despite Obama’s promise that if you like your health plan you can keep it, some small businesses may not be able to keep their self-insured health plans if the Obama Administration has its way.

Last month, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a Request for Information (RFI)[1] notice in the Federal Register signaling that the Obama Administration may regulate small, self-insured health plans, making it difficult or impossible for small businesses to insure their employee’s health benefits themselves instead of purchasing a plan from an insurance company.

An increasing percentage of American workers obtain their health insurance from employers who self-insure their employees’ health benefits by assuming the risk of paying their employees’ health claims.[2]

Self-insurance is attractive to businesses because it provides them the flexibility to design their own health plan.  Plus, many employers find it a less expensive alternative to purchasing health insurance from an insurance company.  And, while self-insured plans are subject to federal regulation, federal law prohibits states from regulating them.[3]

Large employers that self-insure have the personnel to manage the plan and can spread their risk between their many employees.  But small employers typically hire an outside, third-party expert to manage their self-insured plan.  They also purchase stop-loss insurance to protect themselves from the potential of unusually high health claims.

For example, a small company might be willing to pay a limit of up to an average of $20,000 per employee for health claims in a year.  But that company might be ruined financially if claims in a particular year spike too high.  To protect itself, that company, then could purchase stop-loss insurance to reimburse them should their actual spending on health claims surpass a certain limit. That limit is called an “attachment point.”  It is the point at which the stop-loss insurance plan kicks in and reimburses the employer for claims it pays over a chosen limit.

Stop-loss plans can have attachment points that are low enough to make it feasible for small businesses to accept the risk of implementing their own self-insured health plan.

While subject to many of Obamacare’s new mandates, self-insured plans are not subject to the Essential Health Benefits, risk pooling, risk adjustment, rate review, or medical loss ratio mandates.[4]

This concerns liberal “consumer advocates” like Professor Timothy Jost of Washington and Lee University School of Law.  Jost calls self-insurance a “loophole” in Obamacare.[5]  Jost and other Obamacare ideologues have called on the Obama Administration to use its regulatory powers to close this so-called “loophole.”[6]

Their particular concern is that self-insured plans with low attachment points are a risk to Obamacare’s Exchange marketplaces.  Now HHS, in its RFI is echoing this concern.

For this reason, we expect that the information collected from the RFI will be the basis of a future regulation.  We further expect that such a future regulation may regulate self-insured plans with stop-loss insurance and thereby may attempt to make it difficult or impossible for small businesses to self-insure.

The problem with government-created marketplaces is that the government feels obligated to protect them — even at the expense of competition and market alternatives.

John Vinci is a staff attorney with Americans for Limited Government and is the editor in chief for the www.obamacarewatcher.org website.

* * *

[1] Request for Information Regarding Stop Loss Insurance, 77 Fed. Reg. 25,788 (May 1, 2012) available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-05-01/pdf/2012-10441.pdf.

[2] Michael J. Brien and Constantijn W.A. Panis, Deloitte, Self-Insured Health Benefit Plans 5 (Mar. 23, 2011) available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/pdf/ACASelfFundedHealthPlansReport032811.pdf.

[3]Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1144(a) (2011).

[4]Timothy Jost, Loopholes in the Affordable Care Act: Regulatory Gaps and Border Crossing Techniques and How to Address Them, 5 St. Louis Univ. J. of Health L. & Pol’y 27, 77.

[5] Id. at 79-81.

[6]Id. at 80-81. See also Kathryn Linehan, Self-Insurance and the Potential Effects of Health Reform on the Small- Group Market, Issue Brief 840, National Health Policy Forum (Dec. 21, 2010) available at http://www.nhpf.org/library/issue-briefs/ IB840_PPACASmallGroup_12-21-10.pdf; Russell B. Korobkin, The Battle Over Self-Insured Health Plans, or ’One Good Loophole Deserves Another’, 1 Yale J. of Health Pol’y, L., & Ethics 89–136 (2005); and Mark A. Hall, Regulating Stop-Loss Coverage May Be Needed to Deter Self-Insuring Small Employers From Undermining Market Reforms, 31 Health Affairs 316–323 (2012).

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.

Similar Posts:

Guest authors at American Clarion hail from a variety of sources and backgrounds. Their work is featured because we believe they have something important to say that our readers will appreciate. If you'd like to see a guest author become a regular here, please let us know!
Guest Author
View all articles by Guest Author
Guests website
Print Friendly

If you enjoyed this article, please consider leaving a comment below (subject to the comment guidelines listed at the bottom of the article), sharing it to Facebook or Twitter or another social media site, subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader, or have a daily digest of the latest American Clarion articles delivered to your email inbox each morning..

Featured Articles


South Dakota AG Adds Ignition Interlock Device to the SD 24/7 Program


South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today that the 6 month pilot program for the ignition interlock device has concluded and has proven successful and will now be offered as part of the statewide 24/7 Sobriety Program. “The 24/7 Sobriety Program has proven to be an effective means to combat drunk driving in South Dakota,” said Jackley. “This offender pay program takes the burden off taxpayers by keeping qualifying offenders out of jail yet holding them accountable for their actions."


Liberal Adults Ridicule Students’ Patriotism

Bob Ellis

This incident is truly deplorable, and illustrative of the shameful (if they had any) contempt the Left has for America. Public School 90 in Coney Island recently decided to ban Lee Greenwood’s song "God Bless the USA' at a graduation ceremony (while leaving uplifting and edifying songs like Justin Bieber's "Baby"). U.S. Congressman Bob Turner (R-NY) gathered with several parents and students outside the school where the kids sang "God Bless the USA." Apparently it was simply intolerable to several liberal adults who derided and yelled at the kids, telling them what they were doing was "ridiculous" and shameful and that "You all burn in hell!"

Embarkation of the Pilgrims, painting from the U.S. Capitol Rotunda

GOP, American and Christian Values: Christian Heritage

Bob Ellis

This will be the final in a series examining a number of "controversial" public policy areas, and how they fit within the realm of Republican values, American values, and Christian values. Previously we have examined illegal immigration, limited government, marriage and family, open government, and the protection of innocent human life. Now we examine the question of our Christian heritage, and whether it should be considered a Republican value, an American value, and a Christian value.


GOP, American and Christian Values: Innocent Human Life

Bob Ellis

Thus far, in a series examining various "controverisal" issues and whether they can be considered Republican values, American values, and Christian values, we have examined illegal immigration, limited government, marriage and family, and open government. This installment will examine the issue of protecting innocent human life. Some Republicans claim a woman should have the right to kill her own child in her womb, and that we should be able to destroy innocent human life at the embryonic stage in the pursuit of medical advances. Is abortion a "Republican" value, or is protecting innocent human life?


Our Priorities Are Reversed

Jim Bowman

The sunshine is starting to fade down here in Florida as it appears that a portion of legally registered voters are now offended when asked to show their proof of citizenship. Consider the extra effort which this requirement entails and at the same time, what it protects. This objection of an “extra burden and barrier” is unsubstantiated given the many instances where providing a personal ID has become a normal routine.


Other News

Other Commentary

Featured Blogs

Like American Clarion

"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964

Switch to our mobile site

NewMedia blog