IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/15330.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Insurer Bargaining and Negotiated Drug Prices in Medicare Part D

Author

Listed:
  • Darius Lakdawalla
  • Wesley Yin

Abstract

A controversial feature of Medicare Part D is its reliance on private insurers to negotiate drug prices and rebates with retail pharmacies and drug manufacturers. Central to this controversy is whether increases in market power--an undesirable feature in most settings--confer benefits in health insurance markets, where larger buyers may obtain better prices for their members. We test whether insurers that experience larger enrollment increases due to Part D negotiate lower drug prices with pharmacies. Overall, we find that 100,000 additional insureds lead to 2.5-percent lower pharmacy prices negotiated by the insurer, and 5-percent reductions in pharmacy profits earned on prescriptions filled by enrollees of that insurer. Estimated enrollment effects are much larger for drugs with therapeutic substitutes, and virtually zero for branded drugs without therapeutic substitutes. We also present evidence that most insurer savings are, on the margin, passed on as lower premiums. Out-of-sample estimation suggests that modest insurer consolidation would generate significant savings to Medicare, along with premium reductions and enrollment increases. Finally, we find that greater enrollment leads to lower pharmacy prices negotiated by insurers for their non-Part D market--an external benefit to the commercially enrolled associated with administering Part D through private insurers.

Suggested Citation

  • Darius Lakdawalla & Wesley Yin, 2009. "Insurer Bargaining and Negotiated Drug Prices in Medicare Part D," NBER Working Papers 15330, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:15330
    Note: EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15330.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claudio Lucarelli & Jeffrey Prince & Kosali Simon, 2012. "The Welfare Impact Of Reducing Choice In Medicare Part D: A Comparison Of Two Regulation Strategies," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(4), pages 1155-1177, November.
    2. Mark Duggan & Fiona Scott Morton, 2010. "The Effect of Medicare Part D on Pharmaceutical Prices and Utilization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 590-607, March.
    3. Sara Fisher Ellison & Christopher M. Snyder, 2010. "Countervailing Power In Wholesale Pharmaceuticals," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 32-53, March.
    4. Stole, Lars A & Zwiebel, Jeffrey, 1996. "Organizational Design and Technology Choice under Intrafirm Bargaining," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 195-222, March.
    5. Tasneem Chipty & Christopher M. Snyder, 1999. "The Role Of Firm Size In Bilateral Bargaining: A Study Of The Cable Television Industry," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(2), pages 326-340, May.
    6. Jonathan D. Ketcham & Kosali Simon, 2008. "Medicare Part D's Effects on Elderly Drug Costs and Utilization," NBER Working Papers 14326, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Katherine Ho, 2009. "Insurer-Provider Networks in the Medical Care Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 393-430, March.
    8. Office of Health Economics, 2007. "The Economics of Health Care," For School 001490, Office of Health Economics.
    9. Jonathan Gruber & James Poterba, 1994. "Tax Incentives and the Decision to Purchase Health Insurance: Evidence from the Self-Employed," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(3), pages 701-733.
    10. Lars A. Stole & Jeffrey Zwiebel, 2003. "Organizational Design and Technology Choice under Intrafirm Bargaining: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 456-457, March.
    11. Brooks, John M. & Dor, Avi & Wong, Herbert S., 1997. "Hospital-insurer bargaining: An empirical investigation of appendectomy pricing," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 417-434, August.
    12. Richard T. Carson & Yixiao Sun, 2007. "The Tobit model with a non-zero threshold," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 10(3), pages 488-502, November.
    13. Thomas Zuehlke, 2003. "Estimation of a Tobit model with unknown censoring threshold," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(10), pages 1163-1169.
    14. Town, Robert & Vistnes, Gregory, 2001. "Hospital competition in HMO networks," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 733-753, September.
    15. Christopher M. Snyder, 1996. "A Dynamic Theory of Countervailing Power," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 747-769, Winter.
    16. Jason T. Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2009. "Choice Inconsistencies Among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program," NBER Working Papers 14759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Alexander Raskovich, 2003. "Pivotal Buyers and Bargaining Position," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(4), pages 405-426, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew Stocking & James Baumgardner & Melinda Buntin & Anna Cook, 2014. "Examining the Number of Competitors and the Cost of Medicare Part D: Working Paper 2014-04," Working Papers 45553, Congressional Budget Office.
    2. Jeffrey Diebold, 2018. "The Effects of Medicare Part D on Health Outcomes of Newly Covered Medicare Beneficiaries," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 73(5), pages 890-900.
    3. Robin McKnight & Jonathan Reuter & Eric Zitzewitz, 2012. "Insurance as Delegated Purchasing: Theory and Evidence from Health Care," NBER Working Papers 17857, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. ., 2012. "Models of Negotiation and Bargaining in Health Care," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 21, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Darius Lakdawalla & Wesley Yin, 2015. "Insurers’ Negotiating Leverage and the External Effects of Medicare Part D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(2), pages 314-331, May.
    2. Hans-Theo Normann & Bradley J. Ruffle & Christopher M. Snyder, 2007. "Do buyer-size discounts depend on the curvature of the surplus function? Experimental tests of bargaining models," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(3), pages 747-767, September.
    3. Elizabeth L. Munnich & Michael R. Richards, 2020. "Treatment flows after outsourcing public insurance provision: Evidence from Florida Medicaid," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(11), pages 1343-1363, November.
    4. Inderst, Roman & Wey, Christian, 2007. "Buyer power and supplier incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 647-667, April.
    5. Stuart V. Craig & Matthew Grennan & Ashley Swanson, 2021. "Mergers and marginal costs: New evidence on hospital buyer power," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(1), pages 151-178, March.
    6. Yuxin Chen & Xinxin Li, 2013. "Group Buying Commitment and Sellers’ Competitive Advantages," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 164-183, March.
    7. Chiara Fumagalli & Massimo Motta, 2008. "Buyers’ Miscoordination, Entry and Downstream Competition," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(531), pages 1196-1222, August.
    8. Gary V. Engelhardt & Jonathan Gruber, 2009. "Medicare Part D and the Financial Protection of the Elderly," Working Papers, Center for Retirement Research at Boston College wp2009-24, Center for Retirement Research, revised Oct 2009.
    9. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Fumagalli, Chiara & Polo, Michele, 2007. "Buyer power and quality improvements," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 45-61, June.
    10. Sara Fisher Ellison & Christopher M. Snyder, 2010. "Countervailing Power In Wholesale Pharmaceuticals," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 32-53, March.
    11. Baldursson, Fridrik M. & Johannesson, Sigurdur, 2005. "Kaupendamáttur á sementsmarkaði [Buyer power in the cement industry]," MPRA Paper 14742, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Smith, Howard & Thanassoulis, John, 2006. "Upstream Competition and Downstream Buyer Power," CEPR Discussion Papers 5803, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Walter Beckert, 2018. "An Empirical Analysis of Countervailing Power in Business-to-Business Bargaining," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(3), pages 369-402, May.
    14. Johansen, Bjørn Olav, 2012. "The Buyer Power Of Multiproduct Retailers: Competition With One-Stop Shopping," Working Papers in Economics 03/12, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    15. Alderighi, Marco, 2007. "The role of buying consortia among SMEs in the electricity market in Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 3463-3472, June.
    16. Leemore Dafny & Mark Duggan & Subramaniam Ramanarayanan, 2012. "Paying a Premium on Your Premium? Consolidation in the US Health Insurance Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 1161-1185, April.
    17. Gregory S. Crawford & Ali Yurukoglu, 2012. "The Welfare Effects of Bundling in Multichannel Television Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 643-685, April.
    18. Matsushima, Noriaki & Shinohara, Ryusuke, 2014. "What factors determine the number of trading partners?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 428-441.
    19. Bhattacharyya, Sugato & Nain, Amrita, 2011. "Horizontal acquisitions and buying power: A product market analysis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 97-115, January.
    20. Dana, James D., 2012. "Buyer groups as strategic commitments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 470-485.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:15330. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.