Category Archives: Insurance

Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам.

Industry Comments on CMS SMART Act Implementation

Posted on by

On September 19, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued an interim final rule (IFR) addressing implementation of the SMART Act (otherwise known as the Strengthening Medicare and Repaying Taxpayers Act) , and specifically Section 201 of the Act, which requires CMS to develop a final conditional payment process that would take 120 days from beginning to end. The IFR issued by CMS would significantly extend this process beyond the 120-day deadline, and likely undermine the SMART Act’s intended improvements of the Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) process. Several industry groups took the opportunity to express their disappointment in CMS’s efforts.

The Risk and Insurance Management Society (RIMS) called on CMS to rescind the IFR and reissue a proposed rule:

“While we commend the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for initiating the SMART Act implementation process, we are disappointed that it chose to issue an IFR rather than promulgating a rule through the regular notice and comment process. We have serious concerns that CMS failed to comply with statutory requirements to implement a final conditional payment process by October 2013, and that the process it has chosen to implement in the interim rule allows for over twice the statutory 120-day period to obtain a final payment amount. We urge CMS to rescind its IFR and to re-issue a new proposed rule through the regular comment process.”

An American Insurance Association (AIA) task force also found the IFR severely lacking:

“AIA’s Task Force does not support the method, manner and time frames contained within the IFC for obtaining final conditional payment amounts via a web portal. The main purposes of the SMART Act are to allow the parties to resolve claims in a timely manner, with finality, to streamline compliance and make it more practical, while ensuring that CMS receives reimbursement for conditional payments quickly. The IFC as written undermines these goals, imposes impediments to prompt claim resolution, allows CMS to delay providing necessary information to beneficiaries and insurers and will not accomplish these goals. The IFC states it specifies the process and timeline for expanding CMS’ existing MSP web portal to conform to the SMART Act. Unfortunately, the provisions of the IFC do not comport with the SMART Act and in many instances go well beyond the purposes and provisions of the terms of the Act.”

The Medicare Advocacy and Recovery Coalition (MARC), a group created in 2008 by various stakeholders and beneficiaries to advocate for the improvement of the Medicare secondary payer system, stated that the IFR is in clear violation of Section 201:

“The IFR is in direct violation of Section 201, which explicitly required CMS to develop a portal process that, from beginning to end, took 120 days. The statutory language could not be more clear: ‘In the case of a payment made by the Secretary pursuant to clause (i) for items and services provided to the claimant, the claimant or applicable plan (as defined in paragraph (8)(F)) may at any time beginning 120 days before the reasonably expected date of a settlement, judgment, award, or other payment, notify the Secretary that a payment is reasonably expected and the expected date of such payment.’ The language of Section 201 is unambiguous; the entire process – from beginning to end – is to take 120 days, which is triggered by the notice, and which includes the 65 day response period within the 120 day period in which the Secretary is to provide the final number.”

An interim final rule differs from typical proposed rules and regulations in that it is in effect even as the public is still commenting on the proposal. The comment deadline for this IFR was November 19. It remains to be seen what, if any, changes CMS will make in response to the comments.

Weather Risks Often Overlooked

Posted on by

Unpredictable weather is a risk that can’t be put off or ignored. In fact, insurer payouts for weather-related catastrophes rose from $15 billion a year between 1980 and 1989 to a staggering $70 billion annually between 2010 and 2013, a study found.

While major weather events are a focus of businesses, small events can still have a big impact, according to The Weather Business: How Companies Can Protect Against Increasing Weather Volatility by Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty.

Even though weather volatility is shown to be rising globally, organizations are still failing to protect their revenue from the risks of changes in temperature, snowfall, wind levels, rainfall and too much sun, the report found. Changes in weather can also impact a number of industries including construction, energy, retail, tourism, food, distribution and transport.

Bad weather, however, is no longer an excuse for company stakeholders. Analysts, lending and rating agencies are increasingly looking at whether weather risks are included in a company’s risk management program, the study found.

Weather risk management can help companies hedge the risk posed by fluctuations in weather, similar to how companies already combat the threats of interest rate and foreign currency exchange movements, the report said.

Midwest Tornado Insured Losses Could Top $1B

Posted on by

A series of tornadoes in the Midwest on Sunday that killed six, levelled homes and businesses and left tens of thousands without power may top $1 billion in insured losses, according to risk modeller RMS.

The New York Times reported that on Nov. 18, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn declared seven counties disaster areas and said he would seek relief funding from state and federal agencies. He also said the series of tornadoes were the deadliest to occur in the state in November.

Matthew Nielsen, director of model product management at RMS said in an email that while damage estimates are far from final, “There is a good chance that Sunday’s outbreak will likely rank as one of the top five most significant November outbreaks since 1950.”

The magnitude and severity of the tornado outbreak was driven by two factors, he said, “Unseasonably strong thermodynamic instability and unusually strong wind shear throughout the depth of the atmosphere.”

Robert P. Hartwig, Ph.D., president of the Insurance Information Institute said from the Chicago airport, en route to assess the tornado damage first hand, that there is “No question that it will at least be the second costliest tornado event of the year.” The largest event this year was the Moore, Okla., tornadoes, which approached $1.6 billion in insured losses. By comparison, damage from the Midwest tornadoes is spread over a wider area, impacting Illinois, Michigan and Indiana.

“There are thousands of damaged structures throughout the states that were hit—residential and commercial,” he said. “What’s difficult to tell at this point is the extent of commercial damage and that can really drive up the losses. Not only are commercial structures more expensive, but there is often a business interruption component as well.”

He explained that insured losses for tornadoes are typically higher than those for floods. Because there was no flooding involved, more of the losses would be covered by insurance, meaning a faster recovery. “The vast majority of property owners here are going to have insurance coverage. Uninsured losses may include some business interruption loss, vehicles that didn’t carry comprehensive coverage and uninsured structures,” he said.

As is generally the case after tornadoes, “Most people will be getting checks [from their insurers] very quickly, which will help them with temporary living expenses. It will also help them make initial repairs more quickly and provide funds for debris removal so that rebuilding can start,” Hartwig said.

GOCE Satellite Makes Fiery Fall to Earth

Posted on by

Bill Chater: GOCE Re-entry

As captured – and tweeted – by skywatcher Bill Chater in the photo above, the European Space Agency’s Gravity Field and Steady-State Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) re-entered the atmosphere on Sunday, making an uncontrolled fall after running out of fuel last month.

Launched in 2009, GOCE mapped variations in Earth’s gravitational field to help scientists better understand how gravity affects phenomena like ocean circulation and sea level. As Slate reported, the satellite only spent about a quarter of its time over land, so the odds were high for a safe crash into the ocean, but when an object weighing over a ton is in a free-fall to Earth, the risk is noteworthy.

online pharmacy strattera with best prices today in the USA

While scientists knew that most of the satellite would burn up during approach, its 25 to 45 pieces of debris weighing up to 200 pounds each pose a significant threat. Without any means of controlling where it would land, officials from the ESA, Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee and United States Strategic Command closely monitored the massive “space debris” until it fell into the South Atlantic off the tip of South America, south of the Falkland Islands.

Since 2008, United Nations guidelines have attempted to reduce the danger of space debris, and scientists now build extra fuel and thrusters into space-bound objects to help control re-entry.

online pharmacy prograf with best prices today in the USA

GOCE had already been designed when the guidelines were issued, but future iterations would likely include these failsafes.

online pharmacy zantac with best prices today in the USA

The risk of uncontrolled space debris is increasingly common, however. On average, one piece of tracked “space junk” falls every day and one intact defunct spacecraft or old rocket body comes back every week, BBC reported. Renowned astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson was quite thorough in pointing out that major space debris disasters like the one depicted in Gravity are scientifically questionable at best, but the everyday risks merit serious consideration as increasing what we send into space increases what we can expect to fall back. There are currently about 750 live satellites circling Earth and an estimated 500,000 pieces of space debris in orbit, dating as far back as the 1958 Vanguard 1 research satellite.