What is AARP doing to control the costs of the AARP UHC Supplemental Part G plan increases?

[LialT25366]

I I just received a notice that my AARP Medicare Supplemental Plan G with United Health Care in Kentucky is increasing by nearly 19% in October! What is AARP doing to help control the increasing costs of this supplemental plan G? An increase of 19% seems excessive to me. 

[GailL1]

@LialT25366 

Here is some of the reasons why your Plan G in Kentucky is going up - and it may continue to go up year after year or you can spend your birthday looking for a new plan every year within the rules of this state law.  

Kentucky Dept of Ins.gov - MEDICARE SUPPLEMENT UPDATE CONSUMER The “Birthday Rule” and Enrollment Ch... 

From the link:

In 2023, the Kentucky Legislature passed a new law, KRS 304.14-525 (2023 Regular Session House Bill 345, Chapter 182, Acts of the General Assembly), which became effective January 1, 2024. The law applies to all Medicare Supplement policies, including group association plans and closed blocks ALERT

that are available, issued, or renewed on or after January 1, 2024. It provides

new open enrollment periods and an annual guaranteed issue period referred to as the “Birthday Rule.”

The changes that are affecting your increase in premium -

1.  As of January 1, 2024, anyone becoming eligible for Medicare under age sixty-five will also have a six-month open enrollment period for all Medicare Supplement policies, beginning on the first day of the month they enroll into Medicare Part B.

2. The Birthday Rule requires companies to provide “guaranteed issue” rights, once a year, to applicants who apply for the same Plan they are currently enrolled in, but with a different insurer. The application must be submitted within sixty (60) days after their birthday. This is a Plan for Plan replacement only (e.g., G to G) and is not contingent on age.

“Plan to Plan” includes all variations of that lettered Plan. For example, an individual enrolled in an innovative or “Select” Plan would be able to utilize the new Birthday Rule to switch to a cheaper standard Plan without innovative benefits or “Select” requirements at guaranteed issue.

The only difference is the time frame. There is a six-month period for open enrollment and a sixty (60)-day period related to your birthday, for guaranteed issue. During both of these periods an insurer is prohibited from performing underwriting, meaning the insurance company cannot request any health or medical information, including, height and weight, tobacco use, or

prescription drug history.

[end copy paste from the link] 

[ME]   Things like this affect the risk level of all policies in your state.  Even Plan G because if a person less than 65 on Medicare because of a disability has the money, they may really want most ALL of their medical expenses paid for under this Plan - just like you.  Because they are disabled, they may be extremely high health care users.  The Social Security law that governs the program of Medicare made NO stipulation for those less than 65 to even have access to a Medicare Supplemental plan and some states to this day do not or they limit their choice to one of the lesser benefit plans ONLY like Plan A or Plan B.

The Birthday rules allows you to change plans without underwriting.  Underwriting is a way that an insurer can equalize the medical cost of a person moving from one plan (or insurer) to another if their pre-existing condition is not too extreme for the switch to be denied.  But now NO underwriting in KY if this part of the law is followed - 

So at the same time that those under 65 whom maybe high health care users perhaps are opting for a Plan G, you have others of any age that are jumping ship from Plan G to some other Plan G under a different insurer to save premium cost AND they maybe much healthier than the ones that under 65 signing up for Plan G. So there is an imbalance of the RISK in your plan G - i.e., more under 65 beneficiaries going into the plan (perhaps with higher health care cost) and less regular beneficiaries staying in the plan  (perhaps healthier ones that are changing insurers just to save premium cost).

Insurance is a game of numbers - actuarial figures used to set premiums by the insurance company and as I said before many times is based on USAGE, RISK and INFLATION.  When they have this type of unknown as to who is gonna be joining their various plans - there is less certainty that it is a good number but that could mean that they are low in their figures and thus the next year, they have to go up even more to accommodate their losses in the previous year.  

I can almost bet you that your increase in the state of KY may have been higher and your DOI held them down - that may not be the case in the next years once this new law has been firmly set in the minds of the beneficiaries - and they begin to set the pattern.

Just curious - Did you know about this?  Did you know about this law change in Kentucky?

I know that this seems like a kind thing to do, to have these type state laws - for the Medigap consumers - those on Medicare and those on Medicare who are less than 65 and are disabled - but from the premium setting standpoint, it will cause premiums to rise, no doubt - 

I am concerned that these increases are gonna price some insurers out of the Medigap market place.  I am concerned that these increases are gonna force some beneficiaries to go on a Medicare Advantage plan because premiums will rise higher than they can afford - maybe not today or tomorrow but if it keeps going then someday this could be a likelihood.  

So if you are looking to place some blame - look to your state legislature.  They probably thought they were doing “a good thing”  but it is a “good thing” WITH some proven bad consequences for many.  You are experiencing some of the consequences but around your birthday, you can switch plans. That is your solution - You have an out - you don’t need AARP to fix anything, even if they could - in fact, perhaps AARP supports these type of consumer Medigap laws - IDK.

This is a good article - 

Medicare Resources.org - 04/04/2026 - The ‘birthday rule’: a gift to Medigap enrollees????? 

from the link (and lots more at the link - for consumers to become more knowledgeable about “birthday rules” )   EVERYBODY needs to know the Medigap laws in their state.  

although birthday rules have been gaining traction with state lawmakers, they can also have downsides. Requiring insurers to accept enrollees regardless of their medical history can result in higher premiums for all enrollees, and fewer insurers choosing to offer Medigap plans in the state. This is something that lawmakers and state insurance departments must take into consideration when deciding what sorts of guaranteed-issue consumer protections to put in place for Medigap plans. 

BTW, I am adding - the way that KY made their switch law - Plan to Plan between insurers - they preserved the commission of the new insurer agent - Insurance industry probably really like this - well the agents anyway.  If done like some other states where a beneficiary could just switch plan choices and not always insurers, the agent just get a stipend for his time to switch the plan type.

Good Luck to All in your decision making.  

So which way should AARP support in these laws????

EDITED:  for clarity and misspellings.  

[TRL1111]

---

@GailL1 wrote:

BTW, I am adding - the way that KY made their switch law - Plan to Plan between insurers - they preserved the commission of the new insurer agent - Insurance industry probably really like this - well the agents anyway.  If done like some other states where a beneficiary could just switch plan choices and not always insurers, the agent just get a stipend for his time to switch the plan type.

---

I'm not clear on what you're saying. I've read a lot of grousing among brokers that they earn a very low (or no) commission on guaranteed-issue plans, such as those issued under a birthday rule, and that applies to people switching to another company.

In the article you linked to, I followed Footnote 13, which it cited in its discussion of the disadvantages of birthday rules. It goes to a video on medigapseminars.org called "Birthday Rule Disaster: What State Lawmakers Got Wrong" and somehow also "Medicare Supplement Birthday Rule: A Disappointing Surprise?"

I'll never watch a video with clickbaity headlines like this, but I did read the article. I noticed that in condemning the birthday rule, he used Idaho as an example. BUT the example he gives happened when Idaho changed TWO things, not one: they enacted a birthday rule AND they changed from age-issue pricing to community rated. He says that, but then says that in 2022, a 65-year-old man could get a Plan N for $117 a month, and three years later a 65-year-old man will have to pay between $162 and $180 a month.

He goes on to say, "Because their state government stepped in to 'save them', Idaho residents turning age 65 will pay more than some of their peers would ever have to pay, ever, before the government saved them from the evils of capitalism. Way to-go Idaho legislature. You get the trophy for stupid mistakes. Don’t worry, seven other states are trying hard, as I speak, to take that trophy from you. I am sure one will win that trophy from you soon enough."

By referencing seven other states that are considering birthday rules, he's obviously trying to get us to infer that the increase was due to the birthday rule. But that's deceptive, because it's ignoring something far more consequential, and far more verifiable, for his 65-year-old example: In a community-rated plan, younger people pay more than they would for an issue-age plan. Yet he says nothing about that.

But he does tip his hand later, when he notes, "Lastly, there is another problem that Medigap birthday rules create. A problem that hits closer to home for me and some of my audience will be very surprised by. All but a few insurance companies do not compensate agents or brokers for an application made using the Medigap birthday rule."

Probably not coincidentally, his solution is for people to be required to undergo underwriting, and only if they fail are they given a birthday rule right the following year to enroll in any plan offered by the company that refused to issue an underwitten policy. I don't see how this benefits the public OR insurance companies. People have to wait to switch supplements if they can't pass underwriting, and insurance companies still have to accept them eventually.

Who it does benefit is brokers, who won't have to compete with the birthday rule period for people who can pass underwriting, and the underwritten policies will earn the broker a higher commission than if they were issued pursuant to a birthday rule. He needs healthy people to be allowed to switch only in situations that earn him the maximum commission.

I think his agenda is pretty clear, and he's certainly spreading his opinion around under different domains--something I always take into consideration. Here's a different birthday rule article (no video, but it uses a screenshot of the video):

https://livingwithmedicare.com/medicare-supplement-birthday-rule/

It's the same guy, using a different domain. I always side-eye things like this--if someone is just glancing, they could see a lot of content but not realize it's by the same person, but repackaged. 

Given all this, I'm taking what he's saying with a grain of salt.

[GailL1]

@TRL1111 

Clarifying my comments in my post which said . . . 

BTW, I am adding - the way that KY made their switch law - Plan to Plan between insurers - they preserved the commission of the new insurer agent - Insurance industry probably really like this - well the agents anyway.  If done like some other states where a beneficiary could just switch plan choices and not always insurers, the agent just get a stipend for his time to switch the plan type.

My point was:

1.  Designing their “birthday rule” like Kentucky did, one cannot stick with the same insurer and just pick a different plan.  One must stick with the same plan just with a different insurer.  The “Plan to Plan” type switch which the state of KY has put into place.

2.  This does several things that I believe could hurt the beneficiary -

• (a) they are denying them the ability to reduce the plan coverage type with the same insurer even though they may feel this is the best plan for themselves in the long run and sometimes drop their premiums drastically by taking on more of the risk themselves as the beneficiary.
• (b) some insurers even with underwriting might be somewhat accommodating to a beneficiary that they know (current insurer) depending on the nature of their pre-existing condition than one that knows little about the beneficiary and their healthcare usage - IOW, the risk that is somewhat known maybe less of a risk threat than one where they are stepping into the unknown.  Insurers get to make their own decisions as to whom they accept with underwriting or NOT.  It isn’t a clear process unless the condition is severe or has a potential for more severity.  
• (c) As to the agents - from what they say on reddit, they would lose any commission (of whatever type or amount) if the beneficiary leaves the plan which they bought under them.  If they stayed with the same insurer, just with a different plan,  the agent would preserve some of the amount and just handle the paperwork change for a small fee to the insurer or maybe nothing at all. but not so if the beneficiary goes to another insurer.  The new agent for the same plan but different insurer would begin to get the commission.  So it seems to me that the “plan to plan” birthday rule type is a windfall for the new insurer agent. 

I don’t know what brokers make on any Medigap product - 

I linked the article from  Medicare Resources that I had read and found true - I did not go to any of the footnotes - but did go to the one you mentioned and found there was incorrect info in that article so I discounted it.  I found nothing wrong in the Medicare Resources article that I linked.  Even the part where that footnote lies: [from my linked source document]:

But although birthday rules have been gaining traction with state lawmakers, they can also have downsides. Requiring insurers to accept enrollees regardless of their medical history can result in higher premiums for all enrollees, and fewer insurers choosing to offer Medigap plans in the state.13,14 This is something that lawmakers and state insurance departments must take into consideration when deciding what sorts of guaranteed-issue consumer protections to put in place for Medigap plans.

The point is that this sort of switching (plan to plan or some other type) and increasing the gap plans which the disabled have access do increase the risk factor in plans and most likely the usage too.  

As we have talked about before, those beneficiaries that have state issued laws to switch policies will be constantly switching - in fact, it could be years from now, you may find yourself with the same plan you left years earlier especially in “plan to plan’ birthday rule states.

I would hope that people here begin to understand how insurance is priced - and not just gap plans - same with auto, homeowners coverage - USAGE, RISK and INFLATION.  

I do not know how states determine their birthday rule but if you have ever been in a roomful of state legislators discussing Medicare and it’s various tentacles, it is no wonder that we keep coming up with some weird ideas - usually very caring concerns but financial harm to many especially as time passes.

I am still following California Senate Bill 242 - they have made some changes like something to do with the ages of the applicant bit thus far I don’t see that they are any closer to passage and if these age changes will do anything about the increase in Medigap premiums that the California Health Advocate has prophesied.

LegisScan.com - CA SB242 (2025 - 2026) - Bill Title: Medicare supplement coverage: open enrollment p... 

Just another one of those Medigap bills.

[TRL1111]

---

@GailL1 wrote:

• The new agent for the same plan but different insurer would begin to get the commission.  So it seems to me that the “plan to plan” birthday rule type is a windfall for the new insurer agent. 

---

I don't see it as a windfall because the "new" broker does the work to get the person into the new plan with the new insurance company.  And it sounds like in a lot of cases, insurance companies are paying very low commissions on plans that people buy under birthday rule provisions, and it's definitely not a windfall in those situations.

Also, I've priced Medigap plans in various locations all over the country, and it's usually the case that AARP/UHC is not the cheapest, or even near the bottom.  (The only exception I've found is New York, and they have year-round guaranteed issue and all plans have community-rated pricing, so it really shouldn't be compared to other states.)

Also, in the case of AARP/UHC in particular, they don't offer high-deductible Plan G in all states.  In fact, the only one I know of is Florida.  So in my case in Texas, if we got a birthday rule that limits me to buying any other plan from my current insurer (AARP/UHC), the most I could save would be $25 a month by switching to Plan N.  Pretty much a lateral move, at best.

If the version of the birthday rule they enacted allowed me to switch to a Plan G from any other insurer, I could save $75 a month and keep all the Plan G benefits.  That's a pretty good deal.

If the version of the birthday rule allowed me to switch to any lesser plan from any other insurer, I could change to a high-deductible Plan G and save over $100/month (with exposure until the deductible is met).

[GailL1]

@LialT25366 

AARP has NO control over the premium prices of the supplemental plans that bear their royalty name thru United Healthcare.  

AARP® MEDICARE SUPPLEMENT FROM UNITEDHEALTHCARE® 

Read the details and the disclosure.

This broker seems to explain their relationship pretty well on their website -

The BIG 65.com - UnitedHealthcare Medigap Reviews: Is It Worth It? 

Premiums are set like all other supplemental plans based on the plan you have and

• USAGE
• RISK
• INFLATION

YOUR state approves these annual rate increases and your policy controls your declining enrollment discount if you have one.

ALL supplemental plans are experiencing some increases this year - yours seems quite modest compared to some that I am hearing about (not just AARP/UHC supplementals either).

Here’s are some recent discussion on Reddit of what some who are experiencing increases on their plan have to say - They are looking for an alternative if they can find one with or without underwriting depending on the state.

Reddit Medicare.com - What do elders do when Medigap gets out of reach? 

Reddit Medicare: High Deductible Plan G 

Reddit Medicare.com - TX AARP/UHC PLAN N INCREASE FOR 2027 RECEIVED 

Reddit Medicare.com - SUPPLEMENTAL PLAN N 

Reddit Medicare.com - Experience Changing Plan G Supplement Provider in Texas 

There are more just in the last 30 days - if you care to see more.

So it isn’t just AARP/UHC supplemental plans that are increasing in premium cost  - 

I am afraid that it may get worse within more states, if more states decide to expand their guaranteed issue rights or if they extend more plans to be available to those that are less than 65.

[SereneSeagull]

I think there should be a repeating neon reminder on the boards of this, @GailL1   lol!  

[GailL1]

@SereneSeagull 

HOW Many times do I (and others) have to repeat it???? It is not rocket science but it is plain to see that with all the complaints this board gets on insurance and rates, including auto, home owners, health and Medigap (the GAP breed) - and as long as we have all been buying insurance of these types - that more would understand in some way how they work when it comes to USAGE, RISK and INFLATION.

[SereneSeagull]

👍 And utilize the search tools here.  

[DenialJ331526]

That’s a big spike but not unheard of right now - I’d double-check if you’re still in your best rate class and maybe call around, sometimes loyalty costs more than switching.

[SereneSeagull]

May want to read the various threads on this.  🙂

[LialT25366]

 I have looked at the various threads on UHC supplemental plan G increases, but I do not see any that try to explain what AARP is doing to help control cost increases for insurance  plans that have their name (AARP) associated with them. If you have seen a thread that attempts to explain AARP's involvement, etc. to help try to control costs, please point me to it.

[TRL1111]

The suggestion to read the other threads was to make you realize that a 19% increase for an AARP/UHC Plan G is not unusual this year, and if you dig more, perhaps on a non-AARP website, you'll find that it's not that unusual for other insurers, too. 

And the layer after that is that AARP has no control over how Medigap supplements work, even the ones it endorses.  I suppose an analogy would be an independent broker selling someone a Mutual of Omaha supplement and the next year it goes up by 30%; the broker has nothing to do with that.

[SereneSeagull]

Not up to them.