Global Economic Intersection
Advertisement
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
Global Economic Intersection
No Result
View All Result

Revisions to CBO’s Projections of Federal Health Care Spending

admin by admin
July 28, 2014
in Uncategorized
0
0
SHARES
2
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

from the Congressional Budget Office

When we released The 2014 Long-Term Budget Outlook on July 15th, a number of people asked for more information about how much we have revised projected federal health care spending during the past several years. This blog post tries to answer their questions.

CBO now projects that, if current laws remained generally unchanged, net federal spending for the government’s major health care programs in 2039 would equal 8.0 percent of gross domestic product (GDP)—1.6 percentage points, or about 15 percent, less than the 9.6 percent the agency projected in 2010 (see the figure below). That revision stems in large part from the observed slowdown in health care spending in recent years, but it also includes the effects of other factors; some of those factors reduced projected spending, and others increased it.

The programs included in the calculations are Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and subsidies for insurance purchased through exchanges. The projections are part of CBO’s “extended baseline,” which generally reflects current law by matching the agency’s baseline projections for the first 10 years and extending that concept into later years. (See Appendix C of the July 15th report for a summary of the changes in CBO’s long-term projections over the past two decades. All of the long-term projections from 2010 discussed in this blog post incorporate the enactment of the Affordable Care Act in March 2010 and have been adjusted to account for changes in the estimation of GDP made by the Bureau of Economic Analysis in July 2013.)

Comparison of CBO's 2010 and 2014 Projections of Net Federal Spending for Health Care Under the Extended Baseline

Technical Changes in Projected Spending for Medicare and Medicaid Over the 2011–2020 Period

The revision to CBO’s projections over the course of the past four years reflects three types of changes: legislation enacted since 2010, modifications to the agency’s economic outlook during that period, and technical changes (which encompass everything apart from legislation and changes in the economic outlook). CBO does not attempt to allocate the revisions to its long-term projections across those three categories as the agency does for its 10-year projections. However, in CBO’s judgment, the net downward revision to projected health care spending as a percentage of GDP in the past four years is more than accounted for by technical factors—that is, downward technical changes were greater than the net downward revision because they were offset, in part, by other types of changes in the other direction.

Changes in projections for technical reasons may encompass changes made for a wide variety of reasons, including new information from survey and agency data on programs’ enrollment and spending, improvements in the methods CBO uses to project spending, and the effects of administrative actions and judicial decisions.

In the case of the major health care programs, actual federal spending in recent years has been lower than we had anticipated, and analysis by CBO and others suggests that such spending will grow more slowly in the future than we projected several years ago. (For more discussion, see pages 32 to 37 of our recent report; a CBO working paper from last August, Why Has Growth in Spending for Fee-for-Service Medicare Slowed?; and a presentation I made last September, Comment on ‘Is This Time Different? The Slowdown in Healthcare Spending’.)

CBO has also revised down projected spending for those programs because of other technical factors. For example, revisions to projected enrollment have led to reductions in projected Medicaid spending. The two largest changes in projected enrollment since 2010 have been: a reduction in estimated enrollment stemming from the Supreme Court decision that made the expansion of Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act optional for states; and a reduction in projected growth in enrollment by elderly and disabled individuals. Projected Medicaid enrollment in 2020 is now lower by about 5 million people than CBO anticipated in 2010, a reduction of roughly 5 percent.

Taking all of the technical revisions together, CBO has substantially revised down its 10-year projections of federal spending for Medicare and Medicaid from those made four years ago, as shown in the following table:

Technical Revisions to Projected Federal Spending Between June 2010 and July 2014
Fiscal YearMedicare
(Net of Offsetting Receipts)
Medicaid
Billions of Dollars
PercentBillions of DollarsPercent
2011-25-5-5-2
2012-35-7-10-4
2013-50-9-15-5
2014-60-11-25-8
2015-65-11-40-11
2016-65-11-45-11
2017-80-12-50-11
2018-100-16-55-12
2019-115-16-70-14
2020-120-16-80-15
Total: 2011-2020-715-12-395-10
Source: Congressional Budget Office.
Notes: Numbers are rounded to the nearest $5 billion.
The Long-Term Budget Outlook issued in June 2010 used CBO’s March 2010 projections for the first 10 years, updated to incorporate the effects of the Affordable Care Act. The July 2014 volume uses CBO’s April 2014 projections for the first 10 years.

 

Thus, apart from the effects of legislation and revisions to our economic forecast, CBO has revised down projected federal spending for Medicare (net of premiums paid by beneficiaries and other offsetting receipts) and Medicaid between 2011 and 2020 by roughly $1.1 trillion, or about 11 percent. (In a presentation last September, I showed a similar table for revisions between March 2010 and May 2013. Those revisions summed to the slightly larger figure of $1.2 trillion; we have made some methodological changes in these calculations since last May that have reduced the revisions a little.) In 2020, the reduction for technical reasons in projected spending for the two programs comes to about 16 percent.

Total Changes in Projected Spending for Medicare and Medicaid in 2020

New legislation and changes to CBO’s economic outlook since 2010 have also led to revisions in our projection of spending for Medicare and Medicaid. For 2020 (with numbers rounded to the nearest $5 billion):

  • The total downward revision to CBO’s projection of spending for Medicare (net of offsetting receipts) has been $90 billion (or 12 percent), consisting of the $120 billion downward technical revision shown in the table and a net upward revision of $30 billion stemming from legislation and changes in the economic forecast;
  • The total downward revision to CBO’s projection of spending for Medicaid has been $70 billion (or 13 percent), consisting of the $80 billion downward technical revision shown in the table and a net upward revision of $10 billion stemming from legislation and changes in the economic forecast.

Taking those pieces together, CBO’s projection of federal spending for Medicare (net of offsetting receipts) and Medicaid in 2020 is about $160 billion (or roughly 12 percent) lower now than it was in 2010; that difference consists of an upward revision of about $40 billion because of legislation and revisions to our economic forecast and a downward revision of about $200 billion because of other factors.

Changes in Projected Spending for Subsidies for Insurance Purchased Through Exchanges

In the past four years, CBO has also revised down projected growth of private health insurance premiums, which reduces projected federal spending for the subsidies being provided through insurance exchanges; however, the agency has not produced a tally of those revisions at a level of detail comparable to what is provided here for Medicare and Medicaid. Overall, after numerous changes affecting enrollment, the distribution of income among enrollees, and the average subsidy per subsidized enrollee, projected outlays for exchange subsidies and related spending in 2020 have not changed significantly since 2010.

Changes in Long-Term Projections of Federal Health Care Spending

The downward revisions to CBO’s 10-year spending projections of federal health care spending have reduced the agency’s longer-term spending projections by lowering the estimated level of spending in 2024, to which estimated long-term growth rates are applied. In addition, because of the slowdown in health care spending during the past several years, CBO has reduced the long-term growth rates that it uses. The anchor for CBO’s long-term projections is a weighted average, since 1985, of growth rates of spending per capita in the entire U.S. health care system relative to growth rates of potential GDP per capita (with various adjustments, as described on pages 34 and 35 ofthe recent report). That historical weighted-average rate is now 1.4 percent; applying that same methodology to data from 1985 through 2007 yields a weighted average of 1.7 percent (as mentioned in footnote 43 of the report).

Changes in Projections Between 2009 and 2010

Some people have commented on the revisions to CBO’s long-term projections of federal health care spending since 2009. The revisions to those projections between 2009 and 2010 primarily reflected two factors—enactment of the Affordable Care Act in March 2010, and changes in CBO’s methodology for projecting long-term growth in health care costs. As described on pages 33 to 35 of The Long-Term Budget Outlook issued in 2010, those methodological changes were not principally a response to slower observed growth in health care spending—although the slowdown was, in fact, underway—but instead stemmed from changes in CBO’s judgment about what historical period best captured features of the health care and health insurance systems that were likely to endure. Therefore, in CBO’s judgment, the revisions to the agency’s long-term projections since 2010 provide a clearer illustration of how the effects of the slowdown in health care spending that the country has experienced have affected our expectations for future spending.

Source: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45581

Previous Post

Harbinger’s Former Chief Operating Officer Agrees to Settle Charges for Assisting Hedge Fund Scheme

Next Post

Gasoline Prices Fell Over 5 Cents A Gallon

Related Posts

What Are Bitcoin CME Gaps And How Do You Trade Them?
Business

What Are Bitcoin CME Gaps And How Do You Trade Them?

by John Wanguba
March 27, 2023
Zero-Day Spells Doom For Bitcoin ATMs
Economics

Zero-Day Spells Doom For Bitcoin ATMs

by John Wanguba
March 26, 2023
Exiled Chinese Billionaire Guo Wengui Arrested By US Authorities Linked With $1B Fraud Scheme Allegations
Econ Intersect News

Exiled Chinese Billionaire Guo Wengui Arrested By US Authorities Linked With $1B Fraud Scheme Allegations

by John Wanguba
March 26, 2023
Shibarium To Use 70% Of Each Base Transaction Fee To Burn Shiba Inu
Economics

Shibarium To Use 70% Of Each Base Transaction Fee To Burn Shiba Inu

by John Wanguba
March 25, 2023
Is Cardano A Good Investment In 2023?
Econ Intersect News

Is Cardano A Good Investment In 2023?

by John Wanguba
March 25, 2023
Next Post

Gasoline Prices Fell Over 5 Cents A Gallon

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Browse by Category

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Browse by Tags

adoption altcoins bank banking banks Binance Bitcoin Bitcoin adoption Bitcoin market Bitcoin mining blockchain BTC business China crypto crypto adoption cryptocurrency crypto exchange crypto market crypto regulation decentralized finance DeFi Elon Musk ETH Ethereum Europe FTX inflation investment market analysis Metaverse mining NFT nonfungible tokens oil market price analysis recession regulation Russia stock market technology Tesla the UK the US Twitter

Archives

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • August 2010
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized
Global Economic Intersection

After nearly 11 years of 24/7/365 operation, Global Economic Intersection co-founders Steven Hansen and John Lounsbury are retiring. The new owner, a global media company in London, is in the process of completing the set-up of Global Economic Intersection files in their system and publishing platform. The official website ownership transfer took place on 24 August.

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Recent Posts

  • What Are Bitcoin CME Gaps And How Do You Trade Them?
  • Zero-Day Spells Doom For Bitcoin ATMs
  • Exiled Chinese Billionaire Guo Wengui Arrested By US Authorities Linked With $1B Fraud Scheme Allegations

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Bitcoin Robot
    • Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Code
    • Quantum AI
    • eKrona Cryptocurrency
    • Bitcoin Up
    • Bitcoin Prime
    • Yuan Pay Group
    • Immediate Profit
    • BitIQ
    • Bitcoin Loophole
    • Crypto Boom
    • Bitcoin Era
    • Bitcoin Treasure
    • Bitcoin Lucro
    • Bitcoin System
    • Oil Profit
    • The News Spy
    • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Trader
  • Bitcoin Reddit

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

en English
ar Arabicbg Bulgarianda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfi Finnishfr Frenchde Germanel Greekit Italianja Japaneselv Latvianno Norwegianpl Polishpt Portuguesero Romanianes Spanishsv Swedish