Health Insurance Levy

ScottSF

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Ive been wondering about that myself. The four areas of healh services in my view are:
1. Rouine GP/denIst visit;
2. Elective surgery;
3. Emergency room visit;
4. Serious illness.

Private health insurance does not cover 1-3 so you have to pay for these things yourself ... [clipped]

Private health insurance plans cover can cover #1 as well to be clear. Some hi-tech multinationals offer a comprehensive Vhi plan that partially covers GP visits (e.g. 10 times/year up to €40 per visit), consultant visits (varying limits), and dental care too.

Villa05

ScottSF wrote:

Private health insurance plans cover can cover #1 as well to be clear. Some hi-tech multinationals offer a comprehensive Vhi plan that partially covers GP visits (e.g. 10 times/year up to €40 per visit), consultant visits (varying limits), and dental care too.

Some multinationals are reviewing this as well to cut the level cover due to the inflation over the last 4 years Ironically some are medical device companies.

ScottSF

I'd be surprised if multinationals cut their health insurance plans. It is not a competitive move. If they want to convince people to move to Ireland from across the EU (as is one of the reasons for basing their European HQ in Ireland), the health care plan has to be competitive. The nationalized systems in many other countries is much better than here in Ireland as we all know. Plus in the US big employers often provide an even higher level of private health insurance coverage with lower out of pocket costs. I've met a few people that were very concerned about moving to Ireland because they had a family member with chronic health issues and they wanted to not just access to quality care but also low out of pocket costs.

Flem31

Very interesting development on Pat Kenny's show just now.
He had the head of Health Insurance Authority on and apparently to avoid this over 35 levy, you need to have the insurance policy in your own name.
For example, elderly couple have insurance for years with husband's name on the policy with wife down as dependant.
Husband dies suddenly and when wife looks for health cover, she is treated as a brand new customer as she never had insurance in her own name and will be hit with the levy.

Wonder what other landmines are in this policy

antoobrien

Head The Wall wrote: »

It's funny how with health insurance and risk equalisation they want to force the young to pay so there will be enough funds for old people's health insurance.

That's the way it always worked, the young subsidize healthcare for the old, this isn't changing that fact, however by levying older people (35 is older now?) it's shifting the burden of cost slightly away from the younger customers.

Head The Wall wrote: »

With motor insurance there's no risk equalisation so again the young get sh1t on again with excessive charges.

Actually not true, young motorists are considered a higher risk, so it costs more for a young person to ensure a car in Ireland than an older person.

Interestingly, this will supposedly disappear if/when Universal Healthcare Insurance comes in (though I'll believe that when I see it).

Noisin

I have had health insurance for most of my life, had a break of a year when I got sick of paying it.
I have it because I choose to have it, I choose to look up the best plan for me and I pay for it same as ya may pick car insurance, gym membership, or a holiday it's a personal choice. My husband doesn't have it but I'm in the process of looking at various plan that would suit and then going to sign up and pick one. He gave it up in 2011 when the recession hit him the most and didn't renew it as he lost his job. He has returned to college so stil hasn't work.
I suppose this new levy has definitely kick started me into looking up health insurance plans as personally I would prefer if he had it. Dannyboy83i would love to read that article. From someone who has seen 2 family members get cancer and be treated rapidly I believe it is essential to have some sort of insurance on your health that you can afford. Some people choose to go out and spend 100€ on a night out to me that's a waste of money. So for someone to say health insurance is a wasted money may not have first hand experience of the inadequate health system we have available to us in Ireland. I paid 295 for a private cat scan for my dad as vhi didn't cover it, we got the results that day that he had a tumour, I looked for the appointment in Galway clinic and got it in 2 days and I choose to have it done and pay for it. Once we got word and booked in with a consultant the rest of treatment was covered by the health insurance company. I know someone at work whose mother in law went public had a tumour in the same place has passed away since. It took weeks and weeks for the person to receive a cat scan and by the time they got results they were told it was unoperatable. It's a personally choice whether you take out health insurance same as it's a personal choice if you decide to go away on holidays. But it is good value for money if you require to use it. Having health insurance allows you to pick up the phone and choose which hospital you want to go with which consultant provided you have adequate cover. You don't have that control going public.

LostArt

Flem31 wrote: »

Very interesting development on Pat Kenny's show just now.
He had the head of Health Insurance Authority on and apparently to avoid this over 35 levy, you need to have the insurance policy in your own name.
For example, elderly couple have insurance for years with husband's name on the policy with wife down as dependant.
Husband dies suddenly and when wife looks for health cover, she is treated as a brand new customer as she never had insurance in her own name and will be hit with the levy.

Wonder what other landmines are in this policy

The information on Pat Kenny was incorrect. The HIA ceo f***** up there.

Head The Wall

antoobrien wrote: »

Actually not true, young motorists are considered a higher risk, so it costs more for a young person to ensure a car in Ireland than an older person.

Interestingly, this will supposedly disappear if/when Universal Healthcare Insurance comes in (though I'll believe that when I see it).

And an old person is considered a higher risk than a healthy young person so why isn't it balanced the other way around

Godge

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Ive been wondering about that myself. The four areas of healh services in my view are:
1. Rouine GP/denIst visit;
2. Elective surgery;
3. Emergency room visit;
4. Serious illness.

Private health insurance does not cover 1-3 so you have to pay for these things yourself (with the state paying most of the emergency room cost). For serious illness you will get the same treatment but without the bells and whistles of a private room etc. If a private patient was prioritised for a transplant/chemo over a public one, there would be war. Plus, if you are in that position your primary concern is to get treated.

Are private maternity services covered by VHI? I can see how this could make financial sense.

Private health insurance also covers things like routine scans, X-rays, physiotherapy and psychiatric services.

Members of my family were told they would have to wait three months for a particular scan, off to the private clinic and it was done in days. Similarly, a four-week wait for public physiotherapy was eliminated by going private and claiming it back.

beauf

antoobrien wrote: »

That's the way it always worked, the young subsidize healthcare for the old, this isn't changing that fact, however by levying older people (35 is older now?) it's shifting the burden of cost slightly away from the younger customers....

How?

If people weren't willing, or couldn't afford it, before. They certainly are not going to be willing or be able to afford it now. If you were struggling before this, is now kicking you when you are well and truly down.

The only people who this might encourage IS the younger people. Anyone else its just putting it out of their reach.

Cookie_Monster

antoobrien wrote: »

Actually not true, young motorists are considered a higher risk, so it costs more for a young person to ensure a car in Ireland than an older person.

which of course makes no sense at all and is blatantly discriminatory; and is used as a lazy excuse since generally younger people are also less experienced.

A 25 year old with 7 year experience is far more capable than a 50 year old with 2 but do you think that's going to be accurately reflected?

antoobrien

Head The Wall wrote: »

And an old person is considered a higher risk than a healthy young person so why isn't it balanced the other way around

Risk equalisationwhich explains why men have to pay for maternity services that they can't benefit from and women having to pay for prostate & testicular cancer insurance.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

which of course makes no sense at all and is blatantly discriminatory; and is used as a lazy excuse since generally younger people are also less experienced.

It's apparently backed up by facts as it's claimed that:

younger drivers in Ireland are statistically more likely to have accidents, this explains why there can be sizeable differences in insurance costs between younger and older drivers

The AA have some figures that back this up.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

A 25 year old with 7 year experience is far more capable than a 50 year old with 2 but do you think that's going to be accurately reflected?

The no claims bonus system allows for some equalization of that.

beauf wrote: »

How?

If people weren't willing, or couldn't afford it, before. They certainly are not going to be willing or be able to afford it now. If you were struggling before this, is now kicking you when you are well and truly down.

The only people who this might encourage IS the younger people. Anyone else its just putting it out of their reach.

That's one argument. The other is that people often end up getting insurance when they have kids or when they see a relative get sick. This will provide an additional incentive to get health insurance.

beauf

antoobrien wrote: »

...That's one argument. The other is that people often end up getting insurance when they have kids or when they see a relative get sick. This will provide an additional incentive to get health insurance.

I'm not sure making something more expensive is an incentive for people who can't currently afford it.

Or indeed where the system, seems to have little impact for say kids. Where there isn't really any difference between public and private.

Unless you think the main problem is with people who can afford it, deliberate opting out as a lifestyle choice when they can easily afford it.

The insurance companies creating ultra low cost plans (in their mind anyway) would seem to suggest that its affordability that's the problem.

Shemale

For everyone who takes out cover the government collects about 25% levy.

Word of warning, VHI are toerags.

I moved house and was going on the work scheme so didnt need cover, I noticed my premium had increased and queried this, VHI auto renewed my policy. I told them I didnt need cover and they said its renewed and if you cancel you have to pay us the full Government Levy as we paid it upfront (€800). Even though they get a pro rata refund upon cancellation they tried bully me into paying it even though I never received a renewal notice or renewal confirmation.

The other health insurers give a pro rata refund if the levy whereas VHI charge you the refund as a fee but pretend its the government levy.

My advice dont go with VHI if there is a chance you will have to cancel mid term

LostArt

Shemale wrote: »

For everyone who takes out cover the government collects about 25% levy.

Word of warning, VHI are toerags.

I moved house and was going on the work scheme so didnt need cover, I noticed my premium had increased and queried this, VHI auto renewed my policy. I told them I didnt need cover and they said its renewed and if you cancel you have to pay us the full Government Levy as we paid it upfront (€800). Even though they get a pro rata refund upon cancellation they tried bully me into paying it even though I never received a renewal notice or renewal confirmation.

The other health insurers give a pro rata refund if the levy whereas VHI charge you the refund as a fee but pretend its the government levy.

My advice dont go with VHI if there is a chance you will have to cancel mid term

The other insurers don't give a pro rata refund of the levy.
http://www.hia.ie/consumer-information/cancelling

Shemale

LostArt wrote: »

The other insurers don't give a pro rata refund of the levy.
http://www.hia.ie/consumer-information/cancelling

Maybe they changed when this equalisation was introduced, one of my colleagues was with Laya when we were made perm and she got a pro rata refund including the levy.

The loose regulation around fees is worrying,."may charge you", brokers have to issue terms of business advising the max fee they will apply.

VHI told me the levy was due to the government and didnt mention it was their fee, they even included a €50 admin fee in top of their fee.Troubling you can be bound in a 12 month contract without giving renewal instructions or authorising debits from your bank account.

When you move house writing to your health providor doesnt come into your head, they had.my email address but never made contact through it.

Outrageous if they are all at.

titan18

Trying to get a refund off the government is impossible. If you change insurer during the year, the levy will be paid by both insurers. Insurer has very little chance of getting it back

Full Marx

Shemale wrote: »

For everyone who takes out cover the government collects about 25% levy.

Word of warning, VHI are toerags.

I moved house and was going on the work scheme so didnt need cover, I noticed my premium had increased and queried this, VHI auto renewed my policy. I told them I didnt need cover and they said its renewed and if you cancel you have to pay us the full Government Levy as we paid it upfront (€800). Even though they get a pro rata refund upon cancellation they tried bully me into paying it even though I never received a renewal notice or renewal confirmation.

The other health insurers give a pro rata refund if the levy whereas VHI charge you the refund as a fee but pretend its the government levy.

My advice dont go with VHI if there is a chance you will have to cancel mid term

If your employer pays for your new health insurance, even just subsidize a small part of it you will be able to escape your insurance with VHI mid term with no penalty. Explain this to VHI. As with all contracts there are a number of exceptions to it.

nice_guy80

Full Marx wrote: »

If your employer pays for your new health insurance, even just subsidize a small part of it you will be able to escape your insurance with VHI mid term with no penalty. Explain this to VHI. As with all contracts there are a number of exceptions to it.

How many people actually have health insurance paid by their employer?
Very, very few

Full Marx

nice_guy80 wrote: »

How many people actually have health insurance paid by their employer?
Very, very few

You'd be surprised, lots of places do, especially big multinationals. (Mine and my immediate families insurance is paid by my employer)


You can always lie and say your employer has agreed to pay it for you.... to get out of the contract.

nice_guy80

Full Marx wrote: »

You'd be surprised, lots of places do, especially big multinationals. (Mine and my immediate families insurance is paid by my employer)


You can always lie and say your employer has agreed to pay it for you.... to get out of the contract.

The joys of private sector employees.
Fringe benefits.
Is that taxed as benefit in kind? Just wondering.

I still haven't made up mind about the health insurance.
The amount of advertising by health insurance companies at the moment would suggest they will be making a killing on new entrants to the system.
Plus, the government rake in more money

LostArt

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Plus, the government rake in more money

How?

Galwayguy35

I'm 40, never had PHI and won't start now.

Realistically someone would need to be paying between 1 and 2 grand per year to get reasonable cover, that's a lot of money to pay for the next 30 years.

I know the reason they want my age group and younger to sign up is to pay for the older people but like many I just can't afford it.

Full Marx

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I'm 40, never had PHI and won't start now.

Realistically someone would need to be paying between 1 and 2 grand per year to get reasonable cover, that's a lot of money to pay for the next 30 years.

I know the reason they want my age group and younger to sign up is to pay for the older people but like many I just can't afford it.

You can get decent cover for about 800 and very good for your age group for about 1100.

Full Marx

nice_guy80 wrote: »

The joys of private sector employees.
Fringe benefits.
Is that taxed as benefit in kind? Just wondering.

I still haven't made up mind about the health insurance.
The amount of advertising by health insurance companies at the moment would suggest they will be making a killing on new entrants to the system.
Plus, the government rake in more money

Some ps get theirs too, many places will pay half or a third of the cost. Yeah you do get bik on that although I reckon that may depend on who you work for?

Full Marx

Interesting thread here with glo health answering questions about LCR, havnt exactly been forthcoming in their response to my questions have they...

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95033618&postcount=8

nice_guy80

Full Marx wrote: »

Some ps get theirs too, many places will pay half or a third of the cost. Yeah you do get bik on that although I reckon that may depend on who you work for?

name one PS area where workers get their health insurance paid?

Captain Chaos

Full Marx wrote: »

You can get decent cover for about 800 and very good for your age group for about 1100.

TBH, it would be cheaper to just take out a loan when you need it than paying around 30k in health insurance. Or setting up a private saving account for that purpose. PHI is a scam imo. When my grand parents were sick and needed to go private they just used their personal savings, much much cheaper than years of paying PHI that probably didn't cover what they needed at the time anyway.

Galwayguy35

Captain Chaos wrote: »

TBH, it would be cheaper to just take out a loan when you need it than paying around 30k in health insurance. Or setting up a private saving account for that purpose. PHI is a scam imo. When my grand parents were sick and needed to go private they just used their personal savings, much much cheaper than years of paying PHI that probably didn't cover what they needed at the time anyway.

Exactly, and if someone doesn't read the fine print they can just tell you "sorry that's not covered in your plan you will need to upgrade".

I know someone this happened to.

Godge

Full Marx wrote: »

Some ps get theirs too, many places will pay half or a third of the cost. Yeah you do get bik on that although I reckon that may depend on who you work for?

Which parts of the public service get their health insurance paid for them?

Have you got a list or did you just make this up?

creedp

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I'm 40, never had PHI and won't start now.

Realistically someone would need to be paying between 1 and 2 grand per year to get reasonable cover, that's a lot of money to pay for the next 30 years.

I know the reason they want my age group and younger to sign up is to pay for the older people but like many I just can't afford it.

Absolutely. Unless the young can be coerced to join then PHI will become prohibitely expensive for the older population and become unsustainable. To be honest, PHI with community rating is a joke unless its made manadatory from a certain age and becomes the primarly source of funds for the health services. In Ireland of course we want it everyway, taxpayers pay for the system and on top of that if you are prepared to pay a PHI top-up you can ride the back of the ordinary taxpayer and get preferential access to the health services funded by the ordinary taxpayer.

Full Marx

Godge wrote: »

Which parts of the public service get their health insurance paid for them?

Have you got a list or did you just make this up?

That's a bit hostile, why would I make it up? I brought it up initially to help another poster, as if his employer will subsidise his insurance to any degree he can escape his current contract with no penalty.

I don't have a big list but some of the semi states and councils do, albeit probably not for all employees. The HSE do for some, RTE, CIE, some govt departments and I'd assume vhi itself. You'll probably ask for some proof, I don't have any, just what I know from my own experiences and conversations. Why would I make it up? I think it's great that employers look after their workers with healthcare. (Even if I think we should have a proper public system)

nice_guy80

Full Marx wrote: »

That's a bit hostile, why would I make it up? I brought it up initially to help another poster, as if his employer will subsidise his insurance to any degree he can escape his current contract with no penalty.

I don't have a big list but some of the semi states and councils do, albeit probably not for all employees. The HSE do for some, RTE, CIE, some govt departments and I'd assume vhi itself. You'll probably ask for some proof, I don't have any, just what I know from my own experiences and conversations. Why would I make it up? I think it's great that employers look after their workers with healthcare. (Even if I think we should have a proper public system)

Semi state is not PS.

creedp

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Semi state is not PS.

I wonder does the public utility company IW pay for health insurance? Maybe as it provides a gym for its employees they don't need health insurance! But again IW does not equal POS

FreudianSlippers

creedp wrote: »

I wonder does the public utility company IW pay for health insurance? Maybe as it provides a gym for its employees they don't need health insurance! But again IW does not equal POS

They're a semi-state.

Godge

Full Marx wrote: »

That's a bit hostile, why would I make it up? I brought it up initially to help another poster, as if his employer will subsidise his insurance to any degree he can escape his current contract with no penalty.

I don't have a big list but some of the semi states and councils do, albeit probably not for all employees. The HSE do for some, RTE, CIE, some govt departments and I'd assume vhi itself. You'll probably ask for some proof, I don't have any, just what I know from my own experiences and conversations. Why would I make it up? I think it's great that employers look after their workers with healthcare. (Even if I think we should have a proper public system)

The HSE do not pay for medical insurance. Neither do government departments, county councils or non-commercial semi-State organisations. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform do not allow it and the Comptroller and Auditor General would have them up before the PAC. So again, I ask, produce something concrete or withdraw.

The commercial semi-states (RTE, VHI, CIE) I don't know about them but they are not public servants. If you read the FEMPI Acts, you will see that employees of organisations like that are not public servants.

As a former public servant I am fed up with this type of misinformation and lies about public servants that are posted on these boards all of the time.

What may be confusing you is that many public service organisations facilitate deductions from wages straight to VHI, but it is coming out of net wages.

ardmacha

Godge wrote: »

The HSE do not pay for medical insurance. Neither do government departments, county councils or non-commercial semi-State organisations. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform do not allow it and the Comptroller and Auditor General would have them up before the PAC. So again, I ask, produce something concrete or withdraw.

I would say that only people with publicly paid health insurance would be someone like foreign affairs people posted overseas or the like.

As a former public servant I am fed up with this type of misinformation and lies about public servants that are posted on these boards all of the time.

it never stops though.

Full Marx

Godge wrote: »

The HSE do not pay for medical insurance. Neither do government departments, county councils or non-commercial semi-State organisations. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform do not allow it and the Comptroller and Auditor General would have them up before the PAC. So again, I ask, produce something concrete or withdraw.

The commercial semi-states (RTE, VHI, CIE) I don't know about them but they are not public servants. If you read the FEMPI Acts, you will see that employees of organisations like that are not public servants.

As a former public servant I am fed up with this type of misinformation and lies about public servants that are posted on these boards all of the time.

What may be confusing you is that many public service organisations facilitate deductions from wages straight to VHI, but it is coming out of net wages.

Maybe I shouldnt have said anything so. I'm not going to be brow beaten into withdrawing anything. I know that some public service, including somecouncil workers had theirs paid, partly or otherwise. (although it was back when there was just VHI) I'm not confusing anything.

holdfast

The dept of defense does, but they will be stuck with the levy if they wish to avoid future cost. Additionally it looks like they will be hit with BIK for having it.

Geuze

Godge wrote: »

Which parts of the public service get their health insurance paid for them?

Have you got a list or did you just make this up?

Nobody in the public service get their health insurance paid by their employers.

Maybe in some semi-states, but I doubt it.

Geuze

Full Marx wrote: »

I don't have a big list but some of the semi states and councils do, albeit probably not for all employees. The HSE do for some, RTE, CIE, some govt departments and I'd assume vhi itself. You'll probably ask for some proof, I don't have any, just what I know from my own experiences and conversations. Why would I make it up? I think it's great that employers look after their workers with healthcare. (Even if I think we should have a proper public system)

The HSE do not pay the health ins for any staff.

Same goes for Govt depts.

Semi-states like CIE, RTE, VHI - maybe, but I doubt it.

Geuze

holdfast wrote: »

The dept of defense does, but they will be stuck with the levy if they wish to avoid future cost. Additionally it looks like they will be hit with BIK for having it.

The Dept of Defence does not pay for health ins on behalf of staff.

Maybe you are referring to State-employed medical staff in the DoD?

Geuze

Full Marx wrote: »

Maybe I shouldnt have said anything so. I'm not going to be brow beaten into withdrawing anything. I know that some public service, including somecouncil workers had theirs paid, partly or otherwise. (although it was back when there was just VHI) I'm not confusing anything.

No council workers in Ireland have their health ins paid by the Council.

Godge

Full Marx wrote: »

Maybe I shouldnt have said anything so. I'm not going to be brow beaten into withdrawing anything. I know that some public service, including somecouncil workers had theirs paid, partly or otherwise. (although it was back when there was just VHI) I'm not confusing anything.

Nobody is brow-beating you into anything. You made a statement about loads of public servants from loads of different organisations saying you "know" they get their VHI paid. You have been asked to back this up and you haven't.

It never happened.