Struggling state-run health insurance marketplaces are getting creative when it comes to financing their operations. Some state officials are toying with raising fees on insurers, possibly sharing costs with other states or turning their whole system over to Healthcare.gov, reported the Washington Post.
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiffs in King v. Burwell and strikes down federal subsidies for residents in the 34 states that rely on the federal insurance exchange, one legal expert suggests that residents of those states may never qualify for subsidies.
By Dori Zweig The Supreme Court is finally set to hear oral arguments in the King v. Burwell case. The case, over a year in the making, concerns the legality of federal subsidies in the Affordable...
The second year of open enrollment through health insurance exchanges has been mostly positive, but the states that run their own exchanges still face a financial test, the Associated Press reported.
Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear a case challenging the legality of Affordable Care Act subsidies, many states are looking into options that would make them immune to a potential ruling invalidating subsidies.
After a year-long delay of the healthcare reform law's online marketplace for small-employer health plans, the exchange went live in five states over the weekend, reports the Wall Street Journal.
Insurers have varying interpretations of meeting cost-sharing requirements under the Affordable Care Act, according to a new analysis from consulting firm Avalere Health.
In states like Indiana, Wisconsin and Iowa--all of which are offering plans on the federal marketplace--officials are trying to help their residents avoid the pitfalls of the HealthCare.gov website by extending some existing insurance programs, building separate enrollment systems and implementing more protections for certain consumers.