screen-shot-2019-01-30-at-12-40-10-pm-300x292-6373928Requiring New York health plans to cover in vitro fertilization would add up to 1.1 percent to premiums, according to a state study belatedly released today.

Based on the state’s average premiums for 2017, the additional cost would be as much as $234 a year for a family of four – far more than previous estimates from proponents of an IVF mandate.

For an average individual policy, 1.1 percent would be about $80 a year.

New York’s health insurance premiums are already the highest in the lower 48 states, in part because of dozens of coverage mandates previously imposed by the Legislature.

Governor Cuomo, who ordered the study last year, included an IVF mandate in his proposed budget last month. His version would apply only to large-group policies of 100 members or more, and it would limit coverage to a maximum of three IVF cycles.

The study from the state Department of Financial Services – a rare case of state officials analyzing the costs and benefits of an insurance mandate before enacting it – said coverage for three cycles would add between 0.7 percent and 0.9 percent to premiums.

An alternative proposal from Assemblywoman Aravella Simotas and Sen. Diane Savino would apply to insurance policies of all sizes and cover an unlimited number of cycles. DFS said this version would increase premiums from 0.9 percent to 1.1 percent.

A related requirement in both versions – covering the cryogenic preservation of eggs in women undergoing chemotherapy and other procedures likely to damage their fertility – would add an estimated 0.02 percent to premiums.

Supporters of the Simotas-Savino bill have said it would increase premiums by 55 cents per member per month, or $26 a year for a family of four. The premium impact estimated by DFS – based on findings from the actuarial firm Wakely Consulting – would be about nine times higher.

The DFS estimates are roughly consistent with a 2016 analysis from Massachusetts, where an existing IVF mandate has been found to add about 1 percent to premiums.

Cuomo said he limited his proposal to large groups because of a provision of the Affordable Care Act, which requires states that impose major new mandates after 2012 to reimburse the cost for individual policyholders and small groups.

If the Simotas-Savino bill were to become law, the state would potentially owe $98 million to $116 million per year to individual and small-group policyholders, the report said.

Under Cuomo’s proposal, the cost impact would be limited to the subset of large groups that are fully insured. The majority of larger companies are “self-insured” – meaning they bear the risk of their employees’ medical costs – and federal law exempts such plans from state regulation.

Although Cuomo took pains to avoid an additional cost to state government,  his mandate would increase premiums for affected large employers by an estimated $18 million to $22 million.

The DFS study found that expanding insurance coverage for IVF would encourage women to transfer fewer embryos per cycle, which reduces the risks of the procedure, and would respond to changes in society – such as the growing numbers of women who delay childbearing because of their careers, and of same-sex couples who want to have children.

The study also acknowledged that rising premiums make insurance less affordable and could cause some New Yorkers to lose coverage:

It is difficult to predict whether any increases from mandates in these areas would cause persons to drop coverage, and how many. However, given the potential premium increases referenced above, it is likely that some number of insureds who are barely able to afford their existing coverage will drop coverage as a result of a significant rate increase, all other things being equal.

 

About the Author

Bill Hammond

As the Empire Center’s senior fellow for health policy, Bill Hammond tracks fast-moving developments in New York’s massive health care industry, with a focus on how decisions made in Albany and Washington affect the well-being of patients, providers, taxpayers and the state’s economy.

Read more by Bill Hammond

You may also like

Budget Update Paints Less Alarming Picture of Federal Health Cuts

A new fiscal report from the state Budget Division suggests federal funding cuts will hit New York's health-care budget less severely than officials have previously warned. A relea Read More

In the Fight Over ACA Tax Credits, the Stakes Are Lowest for New York

As Washington skirmishes over the future of enhanced tax credits under the Affordable Care Act, New York has relatively little to gain or lose. The number of New Yorkers using any A Read More

New York’s Immigrant Health Coverage Becomes a National Flash Point

A little-noticed New York program that provides Medicaid coverage to elderly undocumented immigrants was thrust onto the national stage this week as the White House sparred with congressional Democrats over the federal gove Read More

Why New York’s Health Premiums Keep Going Up

New Yorkers continue to face some of the costliest health premiums in the U.S., and the insurance industry's recently finalized rate applications shed light on why that is. In summa Read More

How Immigrants Became a Cash Cow for New York’s Essential Plan

The Hochul administration's move to shrink the Essential Plan in response to federal budget cuts has exposed a surprising reality: For the past decade, immigrants have been a cash c Read More

Hochul’s $17B Medicaid Surge Leaves Little to Brag About

Governor Hochul has made Medicaid her dominant budget priority over the past four years, increasing the state's annual share of the program by $17 billion – which is more new money than she allocated for every other part Read More

New York’s Hospital Quality Remains Among the Worst in the U.S.

The federal government recently updated its hospital quality ratings, and New York once again fell near the bottom. Among 132 New York hospitals that , the average grade was 2.5 out Read More

How Washington’s Budget Bill Will Affect Health Care in New York

UPDATE: The final version of the federal budget bill omitted a handful of provisions that had been included in earlier drafts. One would have penalized states that use their own money to provide coverage for undocumente Read More