Payers and Politics: Part 3 - Health Savings Accounts, Rural Health and Veteran Care

Health Savings Accounts

Scenario: Enhanced Health Saving Accounts would have higher contribution limits.

Question: How would elevated Health Saving Accounts impact your consumer engagement strategies?

The impact of elevated Health Savings Accounts on consumer engagement strategies is mixed. While some see it as a significant driver of engagement, others expect minimal change, likely reflecting differences in how payers anticipate consumer adoption

The potential increase in Health Savings Account (HSA) contribution limits introduces new dynamics to healthcare financing, sparking varied reactions among payers about its potential to influence consumer engagement strategies.

Elevated HSA limits are most relevant to the commercial market, as these accounts cater primarily to individuals with high-deductible health plans. Higher contribution limits could enable patients, especially those on higher incomes, to better manage out-of-pocket expenses, potentially increasing their willingness to pursue necessary care.

Any benefits are unlikely to be evenly distributed. Lower-income individuals, who already face challenges contributing to HSAs, may see little advantage unless policy changes allow for more flexible features, such as carryovers of unused funds. Without such adjustments, HSAs risk exacerbating disparities in healthcare access and financial security, providing limited relief to those who need it most. Increased HSA utilization could lead to higher out-of-pocket spending on prescriptions, indirectly shifting costs back onto payers over time, particularly in segments with high drug utilization.

“HSAs with higher limits will mostly impact the commercial book of business rather than Medicare or Medicaid. They may help patients pay out-of-pocket more easily, but this could lead to increased drug utilization and costs shifting back to payers."
_{Dee Chaudhary
 Principal, Clarivate}

Takeaway: HSA limits present a mixed opportunity. While they primarily benefit high-income individuals in the commercial market, they risk widening disparities for lower-income populations without further policy changes. Additionally, increased HSA use may drive higher drug consumption, potentially escalating costs for payers.

For payers, this represents a strategic moment to engage consumers. Educating members on effectively using HSAs to balance costs and care can strengthen consumer engagement while mitigating cost-shifting risks.

Identifying patterns in how HSAs will be positioned by payers could provide valuable insights into emerging strategies for driving consumer engagement.

Rural Health

Scenario: Providers are financially incentivized to serve underserved areas in greater numbers.

Rural communities could benefit greatly from new healthcare initiatives. The introduction of financial incentives for providers to serve underserved areas is met with mixed Payer perspectives on the impacts.

Question: How likely are rural health initiatives to drive changes in the care options available through your organization?

The impact of elevated Health Savings Accounts on consumer engagement strategies is mixed. While some see it as a significant driver of engagement, others expect minimal change, likely reflecting differences in how payers anticipate consumer adoption.

While financial incentives hold promise, their success depends heavily on execution and provider engagement. Incentives could motivate providers to expand services, but systemic challenges like workforce shortages, infrastructure limitations, and reimbursement issues may hinder their effectiveness. For rural populations, these programs are likely to increase the adoption of telehealth and minute clinics, reducing reliance on emergency rooms.

Mail-order solutions could further enhance care access in underserved regions. Direct-to-patient delivery models address key barriers such as transportation and medication availability, improving adherence and health outcomes. However, payers must assess the financial sustainability of these initiatives, as they may incur high upfront costs without guaranteed long-term improvements in care quality or patient engagement.

“We already try to improve our rural services and this would provide strong impetus.”
_{Senior Medical Director,
Speciality Pharmacy}

Takeaway: The success of these programs rests on aligning incentives with sustainable care delivery models. To maximize impact, financial incentives must be designed to ensure sustained provider participation and measurable improvements in access and outcomes.

Payers that invest in integrated care strategies will be better equipped to support rural health initiatives. By aligning these efforts with provider incentives, they can expand access to care, manage costs effectively, and contribute to a more equitable healthcare landscape.

Assessing strategies for rural care gaps could uncover innovative approaches to improving access, enhancing equity, and optimizing healthcare delivery.

Veteran Care

Scenario: There is increased access to healthcare for veterans, with access to more private providers.

Better access to private healthcare for veterans could influence certain aspects of the healthcare system, though its anticipated impact on payer-provider relationships appears modest among U.S. payers. Responses indicate that while this policy shift holds significance for veterans, it may not substantially alter existing payer dynamics:

Question: What impact do you anticipate increased access to private healthcare for veterans will have on payer-provider relationships?

Most respondents believe increased access to private healthcare for veterans will have little to no effect on payer-provider relationships, with a majority expecting no change. However, a smaller group anticipates a moderate to major positive impact, suggesting that some see opportunities for improved collaboration or expanded provider networks

The initiative builds on long-standing efforts to expand private healthcare access for veterans, now repackaged as a renewed priority. However, given that many private providers already participate in veteran-focused programs, the expansion is unlikely to disrupt existing payer-provider relationships significantly.

For payers, the primary considerations involve managing networks and cost-sharing arrangements to accommodate veterans’ unique needs, such as specialized care for service-related conditions.

“Most veterans already combine care with private physicians and VA and some get all their care from VA. I doubt that would change appreciably in these scenarios.” 
_{Senior Medical Director,
Speciality Pharmacy}

Takeaway: An expansion of private healthcare access for veterans represents an incremental adjustment rather than a disruptive change to payer-provider dynamics. The focus will be on aligning private provider networks to address veterans’ specialized needs and fostering opportunities for deeper collaboration to fill care gaps.

Investigating how providers plan to differentiate their services for veterans offers valuable insights into tailoring strategies and identifying opportunities to enhance care delivery for this unique population.

Conclusion

While upcoming government reforms remain uncertain, payers are already thinking about strategies to stay ahead. For market researchers, healthcare consultants, and life sciences marketing professionals, this means equipping clients with the insights they need to navigate policy uncertainty and evolving payer behaviors.

Upcoming reforms are set to reshape payer decision-making across reimbursement rates, provider networks, and transparency mandates. Medicare reimbursement changes may force financial restructuring, pushing payers to adjust plan offerings and provider contracts in response to shifting funding. Price transparency, while designed to enhance competition, also carries risks, exposing proprietary pricing strategies that could disrupt payer-provider negotiations.

Telehealth expansion holds promise, but its success hinges on financial incentives aligning with care delivery models. Meanwhile, drug importation policies may not generate the expected cost savings, as tariffs, supply chain risks, and contract complexities could offset the benefits.

For payers, these shifts represent more than just policy updates—they signal deeper market disruptions. Even if reforms are only partially enacted, the industry-wide response will set new precedents, influencing payer strategies and competitive positioning for years to come. Those who anticipate and adapt to these changes early will be best positioned to navigate the evolving landscape.

Explore more payer-related political impact trends in this three-part series: 

• Part 1: Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare, FDA and CDC reform, and Drug Importation
• Part 2: Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare, FDA and CDC reform, and Drug Importation
  
  

Or are you ready to dive deeper into these insights? Book a call with Techspert’s Payer network