Long-Term Care Insurance, Again

Some more thoughts on long term care insurance.

The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College has a piece on Medicaid and long term care. It's by Howard Gleckman, a visiting fellow at the Center. I've known Howard for years as a senior correspondent at Business Week's Washington D.C. Bureau. It's well worth reading.

I want to highlight one section of his report, on long-term care insurance:

One way to reduce the taxpayer burden of long-term care is to shift costs to individuals by encouraging them to purchase private long-term care insurance. In 2006, Congress expanded the Partnership Act, which allows seniors who purchase long-term care insurance to increase the amount of the assets they may protect while still becoming eligible for Medicaid. For example, if an individual purchases a $300,000 long-term care policy, he could retain assets up to $300,000. Under the new provisions, 22 states plan to begin such programs in 2007. However, in the four states that have operated a Partnership program for many years, results have been disappointing. In part, the low demand for long-term care policies is a result of their cost. A high-end policy for a 62-year-old couple can cost between $7,600 and $11,500 per year.

That's a lot of money, and cost matters.

A few years ago, the Kaiser Family Foundation tried to calculate whether long term care insurance was a practical financial product for middle class families. Here's the study

The study's first pass on the data suggested that three out of four married couples (with the head of household between ages 35 and 59) could theoretically afford LTCI. Premiums are much more affordable when younger. Yet on a closer look, only one in five is well covered in other key areas, like saving for retirement, life insurance, health insurance, and disability insurance. Those other investments should take precedence.

As for older people, premiums are so steep that it's much harder to afford comprehensive coverage. The more affordable pared down products don't offer meaningful estate protection, according to the report. The Foundation calls for a greater emphasis on lower cost policies geared toward keeping people in their home as long as possible.

About the author

Chris Farrell is the economics editor of Marketplace Money.
Log in to post4 Comments

Thanks, Chris Farrell, for all the information. I think it's going to help me make a rational decision although it looks as if it's going to take me longer to figure out which of several options to take in my CALPERS long-term care insurance package than to do my taxes this weekend. The premiums are increasing from $148/month to $208/month, less if one opts for less coverage. I've been paying for LTCI for about 8 years; I'm approaching 65 and working full time. After hearing you talk about LTCI last week I was tempted to chuck it and use the money for a Roth or to do some work on my ever-needy 1928 home, but the articles are making me think it through more carefully.

I hate insurance! I believe they take far too much money out a that causes all insurance customers to pay way too much. Companies still pay for cruises for all their workers, etc. They often say that's our policy and it ain't true. Look at Katrina RESULTS. iT'S SO often it does not give the buyer the feeling of security he needs the insurance for. etc. etc. etc. The print is so fine, I can't read it.

Relatively few persons actually receive long term care in a nursing home. It is also likely that the managed care that restricts hospital care will also greatly restrict nursing home care. For the younger person to buy long term care is to invest thousands of dollars for a product of an unpredictable cost that may not be available when one needs it.

With Generous Support From...