This paper compares health plans currently available on the individual market with employer-sponsored plans. Points of comparison include the scope of benefits, cost-sharing provisions, premiums, expected out-of-pocket costs, and actuarial value. We draw from the 2007 KFF/HRET Health Benefits Survey, our own survey of individual-market plans, the MarketScan medical claims database, and a computer simulation of medical claims. We find that in 2007, employment-based plans covered 80 percent of all charges paid by the plan and the member, while individual plans covered 64 percent. For most people, premiums and out-of-pocket costs were more affordable in tax-advantaged employer plans than in individual-market plans. Proposed health reforms would fundamentally alter the plan offerings available to Americans, particularly those offered in the individual market.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McDevitt et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: