NATIONAL CENTER FOR POLICY ANALYSIS
HOME / DONATE / ONE LEVEL UP / ABOUT NCPA / CONTACT

Saving the Medicare System With Medical Savings Accounts

How MSAs Work

MSAs are very effective in reducing costs because they contain powerful cost control incentives, which in turn stimulate powerful cost-reducing competition. Since beneficiaries would be able to spend whatever MSA funds they did not use for health care for any purpose they chose, they would tend to avoid unnecessary health care spending. For example, they would most likely avoid excessive doctor visits and tests, look for doctors and hospitals that would provide the best values and weigh the worth of potential health care services against the costs. Perhaps most importantly, their increased concern would lead doctors and hospitals to compete on price in order to attract consumers with MSAs.

Several studies predict that such incentives and competition would produce savings more than sufficient to hold costs within the 6.4 percent per year growth rate targeted under the budget for Medicare. For example, from 1974 to 1982 the Rand Corporation conducted a rigorous scientific study of the health expenditures of 2,500 families. Each family was provided with one of four different insurance plans, ranging from a zero deductible and all health expenses paid to 5 percent of the first $1,000 in expenses paid and 100 percent after that. The families with no deductible incurred 53 percent more in hospital expenses and consumed 63 percent more in doctor visits, drugs and other health services than the families with the highest deductible. Yet the study found no difference between these families' health outcomes.13 The Rand study suggests that families today with a deductible of about $3,000 would consume 30 percent less health care than families with no deductible - and would be equally healthy.

In addition to the findings of the Rand study:

  • The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that Medicare enrollees with private Medigap insurance that shields them from Medicare deductibles and copayments use about 24 percent more services than those who do not have such coverage.14

  • A 1992 study by the National Center for Policy Analysis estimated that if most people switched from traditional third-party insurance to MSAs, the resulting cost control incentives and competition would reduce health spending by about 30 percent.15

  • A study by Milliman & Robertson estimated that if most private sector individuals switched to MSAs, national health care spending would be reduced by $600 billion over five years.16

  • A recent Cato Institute study estimated that if MSAs were widely adopted, national health care costs would be reduced by about 40 percent per year.17

Another recent Cato Institute study examined the experience of employers across the country who had already adopted MSAs.18 In this study, the employers all reported greater cost reductions with MSAs than are targeted for Medicare in the congressional budget. Perhaps the best example is Golden Rule Insurance Company in Indianapolis, Ind., which offers MSAs to its 1,300 employees.19 The employees can still choose traditional insurance with a $500 annual deductible and 20 percent copayment on the next $5,000 in expenses. This leaves an individual with a maximum out-of-pocket cost each year for health care of $1,500 (the $500 deductible plus 20 percent of the next $5,000), or $4,500 for a family of three.

But for employees with families who choose an MSA instead, Golden Rule purchases a catastrophic policy paying all expenses over $3,000 per year and deposits $2,000 in an MSA. This leaves the family with a maximum annual out-of-pocket cost of $1,000 (the $3,000 deductible minus the $2,000 in the savings account). For individuals, Golden Rule purchases a catastrophic policy covering all expenses over $2,000 per year and deposits $1,000 in an MSA, again leaving a maximum annual out-of-pocket cost of $1,000. The MSA funds can be used to pay health expenses below the deductible, and funds remaining at year's end can be withdrawn for any use.

About 80 percent of the company's employees chose the MSA option in 1993, the first year it was offered. Each of them withdrew an average of $600 in remaining MSA funds at the end of the year. In 1994, about 90 percent of workers chose the MSA and each withdrew on average about $1,000 in remaining MSA funds at the end of the year. The MSA plan had no cost increases in either of the first two years.

Golden Rule has now sold similar plans to dozens of small businesses across the country, which have reported similar or even better results. Other examples include:20

  • Dominion Resources, a Virginia utility company, cut its health costs by almost one-third through an MSA system.

  • Forbes magazine reduced its health costs by 30 percent using a similar system.

  • A health insurance marketing firm in Kansas, Thompson and Associates, sells an MSA plan that has reduced costs for small employers by as much as 50 percent.

  • An insurance marketing firm in Maryland, Plan 3, has sold MSA plans to almost 100 small businesses, reducing their health costs by as much as 30 percent.

  • Windham Hospital in Willimantic, Conn., reduced its health costs by 50 percent after adopting an MSA plan in 1993.

  • Mayor Bret Schundler of Jersey City, N.J., recently encouraged adoption of an MSA plan that costs the city less but provides city employees with better benefits than their old, traditional health plan.21

In fact, more than 1,000 employers across the country have adopted MSAs for their employees, with similar results.
Such effective cost control incentives and competition are the reason the MSA benefits described above can be financed while still staying within the Medicare budget limits. Moreover, with MSAs the elderly would be able to share directly in the cost savings they achieve, as remaining MSA funds at the end of the year will be theirs to use as they choose. Because of these factors, MSAs will be a highly popular component of the Medicare reform plan.

Next Page...


Home |  Support Us |  All Issues |  Social Security |  Debate Central |  Contact Us
Dallas Headquarters: 12770 Coit Rd., Suite 800 - Dallas, TX 75251-1339 - 972/386-6272 - Fax 972/386-0924
Washington Office: 601 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 900 South Building, Washington, DC 20004 - 202/220-3082 - Fax 202/220-3096
© 2001 NCPA