The Cost of Full Repeal of the Affordable Care Act
Jan 4, 2017 - Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
View
a Printer-Friendly PDF Version
The Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as gObamacare,h includes a number
of provisions to expand health care coverage, as well as several offsets that
raise taxes and slow the growth of Medicare spending.
According to our latest estimates, repealing the ACA in its
entirety would cost roughly $350 billion through 2027 under conventional scoring
and $150 billion using dynamic scoring.
In this paper, we offer rough estimates for a variety of full and partial
repeal options. In addition to our full repeal score, we find that:
- Repealing just ACAfs coverage provisions would save $1.55 trillion through
2027 ($1.75 trillion on a dynamic basis).
- Repealing ACAfs coverage and revenue provisions would save $750 billion
($950 billion on a dynamic basis) through 2027.
- Delaying repeal of most coverage provisions but not revenue offsets or
mandates would significantly reduce potential savings. A 4-year delay would
reduce savings to $300 billion ($500 billion on a dynamic basis).
- Repealing ACA would increase the number of uninsured people by 23
million.
- Legislation to replace the ACA with other coverage provisions could be
costly, likely requiring policymakers to retain the majority of ACAfs
offsets.
Fig. 1: Budgetary Effects of Fully Repealing the Affordable Care Act
(Billions)
Source:CRFB calculations based onCongressional
Budget Office data. Estimates are rough.
Note: Unlike CBO, CRFBfs definition
of coverage provisions includes the Prevention Fund, increased Medicaid spending
for territories and home and community-based services and excludes the Cadillac
tax, which is included in tax increases.
Breaking Down the Costs of Full Repeal
By our estimates – based largely on whatfs available from the Congressional
Budget Office (see appendix
II for details) – a full repeal of the ACA would cost $350 billion through
2027 under conventional scoring and $150 billion under dynamic scoring. Both
estimates would be about $100 billion lower through 2026 (see appendix
I for full estimates through 2026).
Repealing the ACAfs coverage provisions would save $1.55 trillion through
2027, while repealing its tax increases would cost $800 billion, and repealing
its Medicare (and related) cuts would cost another $1.10 trillion. Repeal would
also lead to a small increase in economic growth, which could produce over $200
billion of additional net savings.
Coverage Provisions – Of the $1.55 trillion in savings from
repealing the ACAfs coverage provisions, $900 billion comes from repealing
insurance and cost-sharing subsidies and $1.10 trillion from repealing the
Medicaid expansion. These savings are partially offset by $250 billion of cost
from repealing the legislationfs insurance mandate penalties and another $200
billion from interactions and various other provisions.
Fig. 2: Budgetary Effects of Fully
Repealing the Affordable Care Act
Source:
CRFB calculations based on Congressional Budget Office data; numbers rounded to
nearest $50 billion.
*Excludes interactions with other provisions
Includes Prevention Fund, increased Medicaid spending for territories, and
funding for home and community-based services; excludes revenue from the
Cadillac tax.
Revenue Provisions – About half of the $800 billion of revenue loss
from repealing ACAfs taxes comes from removing the 0.9 percent Medicare payroll
surtax on wages above $200,000 ($150 billion) and the 3.8 percent surtax on
investment income above the same threshold ($250 billion). Another quarter of
the revenue loss comes from repealing various fees on insurance companies,
medical device companies, and drug manufacturers. Repealing the gCadillac taxh
on high-cost insurance plans costs $100 billion over a decade; those costs are
slated to grow substantially over time, and repealing the Cadillac tax without a
replacement would also remove a key tool in helping to slow overall health care
cost growth.
Medicare Provisions – Of the $1.10 trillion of costs from repealing
the ACAfs Medicare (and related) cuts, roughly $450 billion would come from
reversing Medicare Advantage cuts and roughly $500 billion would come from
ending reductions in the growth of provider payments in fee-for-service
Medicare. Our repeal estimates assume that the reductions in Medicare provider
payments already implemented under the ACA are retained and repeal only prevents
future cuts. If past cuts are also reversed, repeal could cost $200 billion to
$250 billion more over a decade.
Dynamic Feedback – As mentioned before, repealing the ACA would also
likely increase the size of the economy by about 0.5 to 1.0 percent by the end
of the decade, mainly by reversing the incentive that income-related premium
subsidies create to reduce hours worked. Were this economic boost to
materialize, it would generate about $200 billion of additional net savings.
Budgetary Effect of Partial Repeal
Repealing the entire ACA would leave no funds available for greplaceh
legislation, and in fact would require further deficit reduction to avoid adding
to the debt. However, a number of partial repeal options also exist.
If policymakers repealed only the individual and employer mandates, the
government would save about $300 billion over a decade as fewer Americans took
advantage of government-subsidized health care. Assuming that gguaranteed issueh
and related insurance regulations remained in place, CBO estimates
repealing the individual mandate would increase the number of individuals
without insurance by about 15 million (repealing the employer mandate would have
a small additional effect). Modifications to guaranteed issue and related rules
could increase the insurance rate but would likely also reduce budgetary savings
from repealing the mandates.
Repealing all coverage provisions – but retaining the ACAfs Medicare
reductions and tax increases – would save about $1.55 trillion, or $1.75
trillion on a dynamic basis. According to CBO, this change would likely increase
the number of uninsured by 23 million, though significant funds would be
available for greplaceh legislation to expand coverage.
Meanwhile, repealing all coverage and tax provisions but keeping the ACAfs
Medicare changes in place would save nearly $750 billion, or over $950 billion
on a dynamic basis.
Of course, temporarily retaining the ACAfs coverage subsidies and Medicaid
expansion would reduce potential savings. For example, repealing mandates and
taxes immediately while repealing other coverage provisions 2 years in the
future would save $550 billion, or $750 billion on a dynamic basis. A 4-year
delay for repealing the coverage provisions would save $300 billion, or $500
billion on a dynamic basis.
Fig. 3: Cost/Savings (-) of Different Repeal Scenarios
(Billions)
Source:
CRFB calculations based on Congressional Budget Office data
Note: First
number represents conventional score. Number in parentheses represents dynamic
score.
*Assumes revenue and mandate provisions are repealed immediately,
Medicaid expansion and exchange subsidies are repealed on a delay, and most
other provisions are retained.
Toward Fiscally Responsible Repeal and Replace
Any changes to the ACA should be designed to reduce, not increase, the
unsustainable growth in the federal debt. Savings from repealing parts of the
ACA must be large enough to not only finance repeal of any of ACAfs offsets, but
also to pay for whatever greplaceh legislation is put forward. This is not an
easy task, and it will likely require policymakers to retain or replace the
majority of ACAfs health and revenue offsets.
Repeal and replace should also, of course, be evaluated on other parameters –
including what it does for coverage, economic growth, and individual premium
costs.
Perhaps most importantly, repeal and replace should aim to continue the
recent slowdown in health care costs. This will require building upon the parts
of the Affordable Care Act that appear to have worked to slow cost growth,
learning from the parts that have not, and pursuing new changes to address areas
of health reform that the ACA may have missed. In the coming days, wefll discuss
more about what must be done to keep health care cost growth under control. It
is imperative that policymakers avoid a return to the rapid and unsustainable
health care cost growth that threatened and in many ways continues to threaten
families, businesses, and our nationfs fiscal future.
Appendix I: The Cost of Repealing the ACA Through
2026
Our estimates focus on the fiscal implications of repealing the Affordable
Care Act over the ten-year budget window ending in fiscal year 2027 (FY2027).
However, repeal legislation is likely to be pursued under reconciliation
instructions from the FY2017 budget resolution (currently being considered,
almost nine months late) which goes only through FY2026. Repeal estimates, for
purposes of enforcing reconciliation, will therefore focus on the ten-year
budget window ending in FY2026 – though CBO may still provide estimates through
FY2027 as well.
Through FY2026, we estimate full repeal will cost $250 billion ($50 billion
on a dynamic basis), the net impact of $1.35 trillion from repealing coverage
provisions, $900 billion from repealing Medicare reductions, $700 billion from
repealing tax increases, and nearly $200 billion from dynamic effects.
Fig. 4: Budgetary Effects of Fully
Repealing the Affordable Care Act Through 2026
Source:
CRFB calculations based on Congressional Budget Office data; numbers rounded to
nearest $50 billion.
*Excludes interactions with other provisions
^Includes Prevention Fund, increased Medicaid spending for territories, and
funding for home and community-based services; excludes revenue from the
Cadillac tax.
In terms of partial repeal, repealing the mandates would save $250 billion,
repealing all coverage provisions would save $1.35 trillion ($1.55 trillion
under dynamic scoring), and repealing all coverage and tax provisions would save
$650 billion ($800 billion under dynamic scoring). Repealing all tax and mandate
provisions immediately while delaying the repeal of other coverage provisions
would save $450 billion for a 2-year delay ($600 billion on a dynamic basis) and
$250 billion ($400 billion on a dynamic basis) for a 4-year delay.
Fig. 5: Cost/Savings (-) of Different
Repeal Scenarios Through 2026 (Billions)
Source:
CRFB calculations based on Congressional Budget Office data
*Assumes revenue
and mandate provisions are repealed immediately, Medicaid expansion and exchange
subsidies are repealed on a delay, and most other provisions are
retained.
Appendix II: Notes on Cost
Estimates
The estimates in this paper reflect rough and rounded estimates of ACA repeal
by the staff of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) and should
not be interpreted as an official score. All numbers are rounded to the nearest
$50 billion.
Estimates outside of appendix I are for the new ten-year budget window ending
in 2027 and are measured relative to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) current
law baseline. Estimates also assume all changes begin on January 1, 2018. In
addition, we assume the repeal legislation would leave untouched any part of the
Affordable Care Act that has been built upon in other legislation (for example,
income-related
Medicare premiums) and that changes to provider payments that have already
gone into effect would remain in place (but no further reductions in the growth
rate of provider payments would be allowed).
CRFBfs estimates are based primarily on three sources: CBOfs December 2016
report gOptions
for Reducing the Deficit: 2017 to 2026," which estimates repeal of coverage
provisions; CBOfs scores of the 2015 reconciliation bill, which repealed the ACA coverage
provisions and taxes after a two-year delay; and CBOfs June 2015 analysis
of the budgetary and economic effects of repealing the Affordable Care Act. CRFB
also relied in part on CBO's February 2011 score of ACA repeal to estimate specific
sources of Medicare savings. Staff adjusted these estimates in a number of ways
to reflect how we believe CBO would score repeal legislation introduced in
2017.
Some experts believe changes in the Affordable Care Act are partially
responsible for the recent slowdown in health care cost growth, beyond what is
reflected in the official score. Others argue that the provider reductions in
the Affordable Care Act are unsustainable and will ultimately be destabilizing.
Like CBO, CRFB does not incorporate either assertion into our score.
Previously, CRFB estimated
full repeal of the Affordable Care Act would cost nearly $500 billion from
2017-2026 on a conventional basis, which would likely be the equivalent of about
$600 billion from 2018-2027. The significant reduction in todayfs cost estimate
largely reflects the increased cost of coverage resulting from recent premium
hikes.
CRFB will continue to refine its estimates in the coming weeks and months and
will also provide estimates for various other partial repeal as well as
greplaceh options.