May 01, 2008

HSAs -- Another Wasted Subsidy for the Well-Off

No one should be surprised by the Government Acccountability Office report out yesterday showing that the six million Americans who opened Health Savings Accounts have an average household income two-and-a-half times the national average ($139,000 versus $57,000). The economics of tax breaks compels it.

In theory, HSAs were designed for people with high-deductible insurance plans to cover unanticipated but large medical expenses. But they work like Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). The government allows a household to deduct a dollar from income for every dollar it deposits in an HSA.

But high income families benefit much more than low income families from such schemes. Why? Because high income families pay at a higher tax rate. So, if that family with $139,000 in income is in the 31 percent tax bracket, every dollar deposited in an HSA saves it 31 cents in taxes. But if that family with $57,000 in income is in the 15 percent tax bracket, every dollar deposited in an HSA only saves it 15 cents. In that sense, it is like the home mortgage deduction, whose benefits also go disproportionately to people who have the largest mortgages and pay the highest amount of interest on their homes.

Reps. Pete Stark (D-CA) and Henry Waxman (D-CA) are pushing legislation that would require proof that withdrawals from HSAs are actually going for health care. But that wouldn't change the fact that 40 percent of people with high-deductible plans haven't opened these accounts, and won't. For people in the lower middle class or the poor who have to buy a high deductible plan because they work for a lousy employer who either doesn't provide health insurance or only offers high-deductible or high co-pay plans, how likely is it that there will be room in their budgets to also sock away a couple hundred dollars a month for a rainy day health care fund?

HSAs are another gimmick based on the illusion that consumer choice is the best way to rein in rising health care costs. Make patients have "skin in the game," and they will make wiser choices, the theory goes.

Yet as many studies have shown, consumers don't make wise choices when forced to spend their own money on health care. In the short run, they skimp on routine and preventive care, which only makes it more likely that they will develop chronic conditions. And when either chronic disease or a medical crisis occurs, HSAs are quickly exhausted and become irrelevant in determining what kind of care people choose.

HSAs are nothing but another health care plan for the well-off that undermines preventive care. The next Congress should repeal this wasteful subsidy, not tinker with its rules.

Posted by gooznews at May 1, 2008 08:04 AM
Comments

I think HSA's have a role for a very limited number of people. I am not hugely in favor of going forward with this model en masse, but in the right environment, ie, informed populace in transparent milieu (good luck), it will probably have a salutory effect.

Again,I am not a big fan of HSAs, but having read some criticism of the GAO report on other blogs, my sense is Stark and Co. are probably premature in blasting, as there are unanswered questions as they relate to the data and interpretation.

Posted by: Brad F at May 1, 2008 12:37 PM

Any government subsidy to improve the Nation's health is a good idea. Just think, with a 31% tax saving to spend their money on health care, its an additional incentive to maintain ones health. It would increase longevity of the most productive tax payers. These people living longer and paying taxes longer, would therefore contribute more total revenue in taxes.

The additional tax revenue generated from these people can then be devoted to medicade type programs to further promote health well being for poorer people.

A healthier populus is also a more productive populus. More productivity in turn produces more output and would expand the tax base.

HSAs should therefore be expanded and made available to everyone without the need to be part of a group. The incentive is to have people decide for themselves how to spend the money, how much to put aside and how much to save on taxes. This is a great supplement to private insurance plans to pay for co-pays, perscriptions and healh care incidentals.

Comeing out against HSAs is contrary to good public health.

Posted by: Al at May 3, 2008 06:07 PM