Health Care Law Change To Flexible Spending Accounts Could Be A 'Huge Hassle'

WASHINGTON — A headache awaits people who use those tax-free health spending accounts to pay for over-the-counter allergy relievers, heartburn blockers and other drugstore remedies. Starting next year, you'll need a prescription for the drugs to qualify.

The change in so-called Flexible Spending Accounts is part of the new health care law, and doctors are bracing for patient confusion and annoyance as they decide how to handle prescription requests for products that people normally use on their own.

"A huge hassle," predicts Dr. Roland Goertz, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians.

Flexible spending accounts, or FSAs, are pretax dollars that workers can set aside through their employers to pay out-of-pocket health care costs. That includes insurance copays and deductibles, treatments that an insurance plan may not cover, eyeglasses, dental work and, yes, nonprescription medications.

But the new health care law says over-the-counter drugs qualify for reimbursement through FSAs starting Jan. 1 only if the patient has a doctor's prescription. The only exception is for insulin bought without a prescription. (The new rule applies to similar Health Savings Accounts, too.)

Another change comes in 2013, when the new law will set a $2,500 cap on how much can be set aside in an FSA. Many employers currently allow up to $5,000 to be put into the accounts – reflecting that they tend to be used for pricier expenses than OTC drugs. Today's average set-aside is about $1,500, says Rose Stanley of WorldatWork, a human resources association.

For now, what do savvy patients need to know in planning for over-the-counter purchases in next year's FSA?

_The estimated 35 million FSA users must spend all their set-aside money each year or lose it. People tend to use leftover dollars by stocking up on aspirin and other drugstore staples at year's end, and the prescription requirement may put a crimp in that spree next fall.

_According to the Internal Revenue Service, the prescription requirement is only for OTC medications, not other non-drug health supplies such as contact lens solutions, bandages, crutches and blood-sugar test kits. These will merely require a receipt for reimbursement, just like today.

_Next year the health care law also eliminates preventive service copays, such as for well-child visits, mammograms and vaccinations, possibly altering how much people put into an FSA in the first place.

_Most affected by the OTC rule will be daily users of those drugs – like people who treat arthritis with ibuprofen, or gastric reflux with Prilosec OTC, or hay fever with Claritin. They will have to calculate if any extra doctor visits offset the pretax savings.

The change shouldn't cost extra if your doctor knows you've been taking OTC medicines routinely and thus has no trouble writing a prescription by phone or at your next regularly scheduled visit, says Dr. Gary Rogg, an internist with Montefiore Medical Center in New York. In that case, the change wouldn't cost anything extra.

If you've never mentioned taking a particular OTC drug, the doctor may demand an office visit, with its copay, before pulling out the prescription pad.

"If a 20-year-old wants to buy Prevacid because of heartburn, odds are it's diet-related. If it's a 60-year-old, you really are obligated to do a 'workup'" in case the pain signals something worse, Rogg says.

People who use high doses of OTC drugs might find a prescription-only version a better deal depending on their insurance copay rules, he adds, even if that's costlier for the health care system overall.

Increasing communication about OTC drug usage would be a good side effect of the rule change, says Dr. Joshua Freeman, family medicine chairman at the University of Kansas Hospital.

"If you're taking something I think is bad for you, I'm glad I found out," he says.

But Goertz says it's not clear exactly what's required for an OTC prescription. If he writes one for a 30-day supply of ibuprofen with 11 refills but the arthritis patient buys once in bulk, will the FSA provider honor that reimbursement?

And there's an added wrinkle for the millions who use special FSA debit cards to pay for purchases straight from their account. IRS guidelines say those debit cards can't be used for over-the-counter drugs under the new change, and will have to be reimbursed by turning over a copy of their receipt and prescription to their FSA provider.

The National Association of Chain Drug Stores has asked the IRS to reconsider, predicting customer anger if the debit card works for one kind of purchase but not another.

Stay tuned: It's not clear if the IRS will alter its guidelines, which are open for public comment until Dec. 27.

___

EDITOR's NOTE – Lauran Neergaard covers health and medical issues for The Associated Press in Washington.

___

Online:

IRS info: http://www.irs.gov/

Preventive care information: http://www.healthcare.gov/law/provisions/preventive/index.html

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.

View the original article here

Health care: employers drop coverage reforms are enacted?

Error deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9150.

WASHINGTON — The new health care law wasn't ain't supposed to forfeits use plans that have provided most people in the U.S. with coverage for generations.

Goal last week a leading manufacturer told workers their costs will jump partly because of the law. Also, a Democratic governor laid out a scheme for employers to get out of health care by shifting workers into rulings-subsidized insurance markets that open in 2014.

While it's too early to proclaim the demise of job-based coverage, corporate number crunchers are looking at options that could lead to major changes.Gov't.Phil Bredesen, D-Tenn.., said the economics of dropping coverage are "about to become very attractive to many employers, both public and private."

That's just not going to happen, White House officials say.

"The absolute certainty about the Affordable Care Act is that for many, many employers who cover millions of people, it increases the incentives for them to offer coverage," said Jason Furman, an economic adviser to President Barack Obama.

Yet at least one major use has shifted a greater share of plan costs to workers, and others are weighing the pros and cons of eventually forcing employees to strike out on their own.

""I don't think you are going to hear anybody publicly say 'We' ve made a decision to drop insurance,"said Paul Keckley, executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions."What we are hearing in our meetings is, ' We don 't want to be the first one to drop benefits, but we would be the fast second.' "We are hearing that a lot."Deloitte is a major accounting and consulting firm.

"My conclusion on all of this is that it is a huge roll of the dice," said James Klein, president of the American Benefits Council, which represents big company benefits administrators. "It could work out well and build on the work-based system, or it could begin to dismantle the use-based system."

Use health benefits have been a middle-class mainstay since World War II, when companies were encouraged to offer health insurance instead of pay raises.About 150 million workers and family members are now covered.

When lawmakers debated the legislation, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected it would only have minimal impact on use plans. About 3 million fewer people would be covered through the job, but they'd be able to get insurance elsewhere.

Two provisions in the new law are leading companies to look at their plans in a different light.

One is a hefty tax on high-cost health insurance aimed at the most generous coverage.Although the "Cadillac tax" doesn't hit until 2018, companies may have to disclose their exposure to investors well before that. Karen Forte, Jakarta, said concerns about the tax were partly behind Boeing has a 50 percent increase in insurance whatever the company just announced.

The tax is 40 percent of the value of a plan above $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for a family plan. Family coverage now averages about $13,800.

White House adviser Furman said blaming a cost increase next year is a tax that won't take effect for eight years "stretches credibility very far past the breaking point."

Bigger questions loom over the new insurance markets that will be set up under the law.

They're called exchanges, and every state will have one in a few years. Consumers will be able to shop for coverage among a range of plans in the exchange, with a guarantee they can't be turned down because of an existing medical problem. To help make premium affordable, the law provides tax credits for households making up to four times the federal poverty level, about $88,000 for a family of four.

Bredesen said last week that employers could save big money by dropping their health plans and sending workers to buy coverage in the exchange.They'd face a fine of $2,000 per worker, but that's still way less than the cost of providing health insurance.Employers could even afford to give workers a raise and still come out ahead, Bredesen wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece.

Employers are actively looking at that."I don't know if the intent was to find an exit strategy for providing benefits, but the bill as written provides the mechanism," said Deloitte's Keckley, the consultant.

Erin Shields, a Jakarta for the senators who wrote that part of the law, says she's confidant that when companies do the math, they'll decide to keep offering coverage.

That's because employers get to deduct the cost of workers' health care from the company's taxes.Take away the health plan and two things happen: Employers lose the deduction and they'll probably have to pay workers more to get them to accept the benefit cut.Not only will the company's income taxes go up, but the work will also face a bigger bill for Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes.So it's not as simple as paying $2,000 and walking away.

"It is clearly cheaper for employers to continue providing coverage," said Shields.

Another wrinkle: the health insurance tax credits available through the law are keyed to relatively Spartan insurance plans, not as generous as most big employers provide.Send your workers into the insurance exchange, and valuable employees might jump to a competitor that still offers health care.

MIT economist Jon Gruber says it's impossible to create new government benefits without some unintended consequences, but he doesn't see a big drop in use coverage."This is a brave new world with uncertainties," said Gruber.Aim "the best available evidence suggests a small erosion.""It's not going go wildly down."

___

Online:

Deloitte Center for Health Solutions: http://tinyurl.com/2ucbnvc

American Benefits Council: http://www.appwp.org/

U.S. government health care website: http://www.healthcare.gov/

Get HuffPost Business On Twitter, Facebook, and Google Buzz! Know something we don't?E-mail us at huffpostbiz@gmail.com

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Fallujah's Cancer Catastrophe.

View the original article here