A week after approving a tax on health insurance policies, Colorado officials are offering more details of their plans to fund the state鈥檚 health insurance exchange after federal backing runs out in 2014.
Last week the state鈥檚 exchange board approved, with broad support, on all policies sold in the exchange. This week the board asked state lawmakers for the right to charge health plans up to $1.80 per member per month for up to three years to fund start-up costs.
also asks for up to $5 million in state tax credits for insurers that contribute a like amount to the exchange. That鈥檚 one of the mechanisms currently used to fund , which will be shut down when the Affordable Care Act鈥檚 ban on denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions takes effect in 2014.
The goal is create multiple revenue streams and keep prices as low as possible for consumers. The board can create some of those streams, including some fees, on its own. Others require legislation.
The board thinks it will cost $22 million to $24 million per year to run the exchange. State law says the exchange can鈥檛 use any state tax revenue.
The state鈥檚 health insurance plans say they鈥檙e OK with the new fees and proposed tax credit.
鈥淭he idea of having a wide and broad funding structure for the exchange is important to carriers,鈥� said Mark Reece, associate director of the . 鈥淭his bill adequately meets that 鈥� assessment structure we鈥檝e been looking for.鈥�
Reece conditioned his organization鈥檚 support on additional details that remain to be worked out with the bill鈥檚 , Beth McCann.
Business groups, including the local chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses and , also voiced support for the bill, and for the exchange as a means of increasing coverage and competition in the state鈥檚 insurance markets.
Two also testified in favor of the temporary per member per month assessment and tax credits for insurers supporting the exchange. No one testified against the bill.
No lawmakers expressed opposition to the bill upon its introduction, but no vote was taken. The committee hearing the bill laid it over to give its sponsor more time to work out details with interested parties.
This story is part of a collaboration that includes , and Kaiser Health News.