Dataset Information

The role of premium subsidies in crop insurance.

ABSTRACT: This study develops a novel framework of heterogeneous producer attitudes towards risk to analyze different, stated and revealed, roles of crop insurance premium subsidies and underlying policy objectives of the government. The analysis reveals a strong connection and a complementarity between the roles of premium subsidies in increasing producer participation in crop insurance, inducing a desired separating equilibrium in the presence of asymmetric information, and transferring income to agricultural producers participating in the program. Developing an alternative design of premium subsidies that can achieve the stated government objective of increased producer participation and induce any desired separating equilibrium at significantly reduced costs, our study rejects the idea that the income redistribution taking place under the current policy design is necessary for increasing producer participation in crop insurance. Indeed, the current policy design reveals that premium subsidies are either a means of income redistribution or a policy failure.

SUBMITTER: Mavroutsikos C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8043382 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The role of premium subsidies in crop insurance.

Mavroutsikos Charalampos C Giannakas Konstantinos K Walters Cory C

PloS one 20210413 4

This study develops a novel framework of heterogeneous producer attitudes towards risk to analyze different, stated and revealed, roles of crop insurance premium subsidies and underlying policy objectives of the government. The analysis reveals a strong connection and a complementarity between the roles of premium subsidies in increasing producer participation in crop insurance, inducing a desired separating equilibrium in the presence of asymmetric information, and transferring income to agricu ...[more]

PMID: 33848302

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe Affordable Care Act allows insurers to charge up to 50% higher premiums to tobacco users, making tobacco use the only behavioral factor that can be used to rate premiums in the nongroup insurance market. Some states have set more restrictive limits on rating for tobacco use, and several states have outlawed tobacco premium surcharges altogether. We examined the impact of state level tobacco surcharge policy on health insurance enrollment decisions among smokers.Study designWe compared insurance enrollment in states that did and did not allow tobacco surcharges, using a difference-in-difference approach to compare the policy effects among smokers and nonsmokers. We also used geographic variation in tobacco surcharges to examine how the size of the surcharge affects insurance coverage, again comparing smokers to nonsmokers.Data collectionWe linked data from two components of the Current Population Survey-the 2015 and 2019 Annual Social and Economic Supplement and the Tobacco Use Supplement, which we combined with data on marketplace plan premiums. We also collected qualitative data from a survey of smokers who did not have insurance through an employer or public program.Principal findingsAllowing a tobacco surcharge reduced insurance enrollment among smokers by 4.0 percentage points (P = .01). Further, smokers without insurance through an employer or public program were 9.0 percentage points less likely (P < .01) to enroll in a nongroup plan if they were subject to a tobacco surcharge. In states with surcharges, enrollment among smokers was 3.4 percentage points lower (P < .01) for every 10 percentage point increase in the tobacco surcharge.ConclusionsTobacco use is the largest cause of preventable illness in the United States. State tobacco surcharge policy may have a substantial impact on whether tobacco users choose to remain insured and consequently their ability to receive care critical for preventing and treating tobacco-related disease.

Project description:ImportanceRecent subsidy enhancements in Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplaces made many low-income enrolles (below 150% of the federal poverty level [FPL]) eligible for 2 free silver-tier plans. eligible for 2 free silver-tier plans. However, an unintended consequence of this structure is that the identity of which silver plans are free will often "turn over" between years, requiring that enrollees actively initiate premium payment (or lose coverage). The prevalence of this free-plan turnover is not known.ObjectiveTo measure the prevalence of free-plan turnover in ACA Marketplaces and to estimate how many enrollees below 150% of FPL are likely to be affected.Design setting and participantsThis observational cross-sectional study used data on plan offerings and premiums in 33 state ACA Marketplaces using HealthCare.gov in 2021 and 2022, along with estimates of county-level enrollee characteristics and plan selection patterns. The enrollment-weighted share of county markets affected by free-plan turnover was quantified, along with the association of turnover with enrollee and market characteristics. Estimates of the number of affected low-income enrollees were calculated using the data plus statistics reported in past research. Data were analyzed from November 21, 2021, to February 28, 2022.ResultsThis study found that turnover of zero-premium plans was quite common, with 93% of HealthCare.gov counties (weighted by enrollment) experiencing at least 1 zero-premium plan in 2021 turning over to nonfree in 2022; 84% of counties experienced turnover of all $0 silver plans from 2021 to 2022. This turnover affected an estimated 1.36 million people with incomes below 150% of FPL. Turnover was more common in counties with a higher share of non-White enrollees, in Medicaid nonexpansion states, in counties with more carriers, and in counties with changes in the number of offered plans.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that owing to the prevalence of zero-premium plan turnover, many low-income ACA enrollees faced elevated risk of disenrollment at the start of 2022. Outreach to affected enrollees and other actions to encourage coverage retention and midyear reenrollment could help mitigate coverage losses.

Project description:ImportanceCosts of employer-sponsored health care benefits have increased faster than workers' wages for several decades, with important implications for disparities in earnings and wage stagnation.ObjectiveTo quantify how growth in employer-sponsored health insurance (ESI) premiums may have been associated with reduced annual wages, disparities in earnings by race and ethnicity and wage level, and wage stagnation among US families with ESI.Design, setting, and participantsIn this economic evaluation, serial cross-sectional analyses were performed of US families receiving ESI from 1988 to 2019 based on data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey, Kaiser Employer Health Benefits Survey, US Census Bureau's Current Population Survey, and federal payroll taxation rates. Statistical analysis was conducted from February 2022 to July 2023.Main outcomes and measuresPercentage of annual compensation associated with health care premiums (after accounting for tax deductibility) and lost wages associated with growth in cost of premiums from 1989 to 2019 based on 1988 compensation. To assess disparities, analyses were stratified by race and ethnicity and wage level.ResultsIn 1988, 44.7 million individuals (head of household: mean [SD] age, 43.3 [13.1] years; 30.1% were female; and 2.4% identified as Asian, 6.2% as Hispanic, 8.6% as non-Hispanic Black, and 82.8% as non-Hispanic White) were covered by ESI family plans; this number remained similar in 2019 at 44.8 million individuals (head of household: mean [SD] age, 47.1 [12.9] years; 41.3% were female; and 1.3% identified as Asian, 9.9% as Hispanic, 9.9% as non-Hispanic Black, and 78.9% as non-Hispanic White). In 1988, the mean (SD) household size was 3.3 (1.3) people, and in 2019, it was 3.4 (1.3) people. If ESI costs had remained at the same proportion of the 1988 average compensation package, then in 2019, the median US family with ESI could have earned $8774 (95% CI, $8354-$9195) more in annual wages. During all 32 years, health care premiums as a percentage of compensation were greater for non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic families than for non-Hispanic White families. By 2019, 13.8% (95% CI, 13.5%-14.1%) of compensation among non-Hispanic White families with ESI went to premium costs compared with 19.2% (95% CI, 18.8%-19.7%) among non-Hispanic Black families and 19.8% (19.3%-20.3%) among Hispanic families with ESI. In 2019, health care premiums as a percentage of compensation at the 95th percentile of earnings for families with ESI were 3.9% (95% CI, 3.8%-4.0%) compared with 28.5% (95% CI, 27.8%-29.2%) at the 20th percentile of earnings. From 1988 to 2019, the mean cumulative lost earnings associated with growth in health care premiums for the median US family with ESI was $125 340 (95% CI, $120 155-$130 525) in 2019 dollars, 4.7% of earnings over the 32-year period.Conclusions and relevanceThis economic evaluation of US families receiving ESI suggests that 3 decades of increasing health care premiums were likely associated with reduced annual earnings and increased earnings inequality by race and ethnicity and wage level and were meaningfully associated with wage stagnation.

Dataset Information

The role of premium subsidies in crop insurance.

Publications

The role of premium subsidies in crop insurance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets