Government Mandates and Employer-Based Health Insurance: Who Is Still Not Covered?
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper we explore the probability that employees have employer-based health insurance. Health insurance is a fixed cost which when added to cash compensation raises the cost of a low-wage worker more than that of a non-low-wage worker. A worker who has high expected medical expenditures or whose family has such expenditures may raise the cost of health insurance for all workers in the firm, particularly in a small firm. The minimum wage reduces an employer’s ability to shift the cost of coverage to low-wage employees. These factors, along with a government subsidy that is more valuable to higher-income employees, lead to private-employer-based coverage that is highly correlated with wages. The nondiscrimination law attempts to change this pattern. We explore the resulting pattern of coverage and the effectiveness of the nondiscrimination law using national medical expenditure data from 1977 and 1987. Individual expected medical expenditures are estimated using a nonparametric approach; wages and premiums are also imputed and coverage itself is estimated using logit models over low-wage and non-low-wage samples separately for 1977 and 1987. Bootstrap methods test the robustness of our model.
منابع مشابه
Prevalence of Employer Self-Insured Health Benefits
Many large employers prefer to self-insure health plans offered to employees rather than purchase them from insurance companies to save costs and to avoid the burden of complying with varying state mandates. This concerns state governments because they cannot directly regulate self-insured plans. This article describes the prevalence of employer self-insurance for the nation and by state in 199...
متن کاملThe economics of employer versus individual mandates.
This paper reviews the economic implications of employer and individual health insurance mandates. Although the cost of meeting an employer mandate is nominally paid by employers, in the long run much of the cost may be shifted backward to employees in the form of lower wages. We also compare the consequences of hypothetical employer and individual health insurance mandates for families with di...
متن کاملThe Effect of an Employer Health Insurance Mandate on Health Insurance Coverage and the Demand for Labor: Evidence from Hawaii
Long before passage of the federal health care reform act in 2010, which eventually will impose an individual mandate to obtain health insurance, policy makers had considered the alternative approach of employer health insurance mandates as a strategy for expanding coverage. At the Federal level, the failed health care reform plans proposed by the Nixon administration in the early 1970s and the...
متن کاملA reappraisal of private employers' role in providing health insurance.
BACKGROUND In 1996, according to official figures, 61 percent of Americans received health insurance through employers. However, this estimate includes persons who relied primarily on government insurance such as Medicare, workers whose employers arranged their insurance but contributed nothing toward the premiums, and government employees whose private coverage was paid for by taxpayers. MET...
متن کاملSetting a national minimum standard for health benefits: how do state benefit mandates compare with benefits in large-group plans?
Many proposed health insurance reforms would establish a federal minimum benefit standard--a baseline set of benefits to ensure that people have adequate coverage and financial protection when they purchase insurance. Currently, benefit mandates are set at the state level; these vary greatly across states and generally target specific areas rather than set an overall standard for what qualifies...
متن کامل