It’s no magic formula that financing long-term care is now an enormous problem for America.
Although 70% of People in america older than 65 will probably need long-term good care at some point throughout their lives, only about one in ten own long-term health care insurance which funds only about 4% of long-term treatment expenditures. At the same time, fewer and fewer companies are writing traditional long-term care insurance, and the price tag on long-term good care insurance keeps rising.
Medicare and private medical health insurance provide minimal coverage for long-term treatment. Medicaid (which is co-funded by the state governments and the government) ultimately pays for almost all long-term care expenses in this country, but to qualify for Medicaid one must fundamentally go broke. Not surprisingly, spending money on long-term good care is Medicaid’s sole largest charge. And the expenses can only expand as the infant boomers age.
A new notice might advise consumers considering coverage changes to seek professional advice.
It was with this track record that the Long-Term Good care Improvements Subgroup of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) lately adopted a study which reviewed the express of long-term care in this country. The subgroup concluded that one of the feasible options to privately finance long-term care costs is actually a life arrangement. Yes, sometimes money derived from a life insurance policy can provide more benefit while the covered by insurance is alive than after fatality.
This comes as no real surprise to us, as we’ve written often that, although generally a final vacation resort, a life settlement can make a meaningful difference to someone having to pay for long-term care expenses. Not merely can a life settlement deal provide much-needed funds, but a private-paying long-term attention patient has many more attention options and a wider choice of facilities than someone on Medicaid.
What does come as a nice surprise to us is the acknowledgement by the NAIC that life settlements can have merit. The NAIC’s model life negotiation act is normally unfriendly to the life pay out industry and reflects the inexplicable bias against life settlements by some of the large Sell Your Life Insurance coverage carriers. Fortunately, recognizing this bias, relatively few state governments have used the NAIC model. Being consistent with what almost all states have adopted and the long-term good care study’s realization about life settlements, the NAIC should now revisit its model work to make it more workable and less antagonistic towards life settlements.
Producers are generally asked by clients to look for long-term health care insurance only after the client’s health has deteriorated and they no longer define. Such a customer is actually a potential prospect for a life settlement deal in the foreseeable future. In keeping with the NAIC’s study, when a customer is declined for long-term care and attention insurance, a developer should apprise your client a life settlement could be a choice to invest in long-term care and attention, if the necessity arises.