Horizontal and vertical equity and public subsidies for private health insurance in the U.S
- PMID: 38788429
- DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116994
Horizontal and vertical equity and public subsidies for private health insurance in the U.S
Abstract
The United States offers two markedly different subsidy structures for private health insurance. When covered through employer-based plans, employees and their dependents benefit from the exclusion from taxable income of the premiums. Individuals without access to employer coverage may obtain subsidies for Marketplace coverage. This paper seeks to understand how the public subsidies embedded in the privately financed portion of the U.S. healthcare system impact the payments families are required to make under both ESI and Marketplace coverage, and the implications for finance equity. Using the Household Component of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS-HC) and Marketplace premium data, we assess horizontal and vertical equity by calculating public subsidies for and expected family spending under each coverage source and using Lorenz curves and Gini and concentration coefficients. Our study pooled the 2018 and 2019 MEPS-HC to achieve a sample size of 10,593 observations. Our simulations showed a marked horizontal inequity for lower-income families with access to employer coverage who cannot obtain Marketplace subsidies. Relative to both the financing of employer coverage and earlier Marketplace tax credits, the more generous Marketplace premium subsidies, first made available in 2021 under the American Rescue Plan Act, substantially increased the vertical equity of Marketplace financing. While Marketplace subsidies have clearly improved equity within the United States, we conclude with a comparison to other OECD countries highlighting the persistence of inequities in the U.S. stemming from its noteworthy reliance on employer-based private health insurance.
Keywords: Equity; Gini coefficient; Health insurance coverage; Horizontal equity; Lorenz curve; Out-of-pocket spending; Public subsidies; Vertical equity.
Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Similar articles
-
Americans' Experiences with ACA Marketplace Coverage: Affordability and Provider Network Satisfaction: Findings from the Commonwealth Fund Affordable Care Act Tracking Survey, February--April 2016.Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2016 Jul;17:1-20. Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2016. PMID: 27400465
-
Tax subsidies for employer-sponsored health insurance: updated microsimulation estimates and sensitivity to alternative incidence assumptions.Health Serv Res. 2013 Apr;48(2 Pt 2):866-83. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12037. Epub 2013 Feb 10. Health Serv Res. 2013. PMID: 23398400 Free PMC article.
-
Marketplace Subsidies: Changing The 'Family Glitch' Reduces Family Health Spending But Increases Government Costs.Health Aff (Millwood). 2016 Jul 1;35(7):1167-75. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1491. Health Aff (Millwood). 2016. PMID: 27385230
-
Differences in Health Insurance Coverage between Part-Time and Full-Time Private-Sector Workers, 2005 and 2015.2018 Apr. In: Statistical Brief (Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (US)) [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2001–. STATISTICAL BRIEF #511. 2018 Apr. In: Statistical Brief (Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (US)) [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2001–. STATISTICAL BRIEF #511. PMID: 29792619 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Private Equity and Radiology: Productive Partnership or Inherently Misaligned?Semin Intervent Radiol. 2023 Nov 2;40(5):449-451. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1775720. eCollection 2023 Oct. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2023. PMID: 37927526 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
