Your company may be having second thoughts about the health insurance it offers to your spouse. That means you might wind up paying more for that coverage or have to switch your spouse to another plan as early as next year.


Some employers are considering adding a surcharge to cover the health care expenses of their workers' spouses. Others, like package deliverer United Parcel Service Inc., are excluding spouses from coverage if they are able to get insurance through another employer.


Twenty percent of nearly 600 large employers in a survey completed earlier this year charged a spousal surcharge in 2013. An additional 13 percent plan to do so next year, according to the study, which was conducted by benefits consultant Towers Watson and the nonprofit National Business Group on Health. Those surcharges average about $100 a month, or roughly double what they averaged a couple years ago.


The study also found that 4 percent of companies excluded spouses from their health plans when similar coverage was available through the spouse's employer. And another 8 percent planned to do so next year.


The changes, which many companies will announce as part of the open enrollment period this fall for health plans that start Jan. 1, are an effort by employers to control rising health care costs. Employer-provided coverage is the most common form of health insurance in the U.S., covering about 149 million workers, according to the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation. And benefits consultants say that total could grow next year when the health care overhaul starts requiring most U.S. residents to have insurance.


Tracy Watts, a senior partner at benefits consultancy Mercer, said companies "are looking for ways to still provide this (health insurance) benefit that is so valuable to their employees but at the same time manage how much they can afford to pay for those benefits."


When considering possible cuts, health care costs for spouses is an area employers consider because employees' spouses tend to use the health care system more, and thus, are more costly. In fact, plans paid an average of $5,540 in medical claims per person annually for spouses last year, $4,088 for employees and about $2,000 for children and other dependents, according to Mercer.


In some cases, benefits experts blame the difference on the fact that the spouse is often a woman. Women tend to use the health care system more as they move through their 20s and into middle age, especially if they have children. Conversely, men generally use it more later in life.


As a result, companies are rethinking spousal coverage. Although some employers expect to add surcharges for spousal coverage or are paying a smaller share of the bill for coverage that extends beyond the individual employee, a relatively small percentage of companies are planning to not cover spouses that can get benefits elsewhere.



UPS, for instance, announced this year that it plans to drop health insurance benefits for working spouses of its nonunion employees if they can get coverage elsewhere, starting Jan. 1. The Atlanta-based company, which employs about 323,000 people in the United States, estimates that 15,000 of the 33,000 spouses it covers will be dropped.


The University of Virginia also decided to drop coverage for spouses, starting Jan. 1, if the spouse has access through his or her own employer to affordable health care. The university's health plan covers about 20,000 people.


McGregor McCance, a spokesman for the University of Virginia, said that the university "wants to take steps today that can help it provide good benefits in the future but also contain the rising costs caused by a variety of sources."


The exclusion of spouses will likely grow faster among smaller employers. Those companies have faced big cost hikes in recent years, in part because they have less negotiating leverage over the premiums they pay. They are more likely to be aggressive in corralling costs.


But overall, companies have to consider spousal exclusions carefully before taking such a step, said Randall Abbott, a senior health care consultant with Towers Watson.


"You can't just do what everybody else does," he said. "You have to step back and say, `What would this mean to my employee population?' It's a pretty complicated decision."





Loading Slideshow...



  • McDonald's


    <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/cfo/2012/07/23/mcdonalds-cfo-sees-up-to-420m-in-new-health-care-costs/" target="_blank">Peter Bensen, McDonald's chief financial officer</a>, said on a conference call last year that Obamacare will cost the company and its franchisees $140 million to $420 million per year. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)




  • Whole Foods


    <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/whole-foods-ceo-obamacare-fascism_n_2488029.html" target="_blank">John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods, told NPR</a> in January that Obamacare is "like fascism." <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/whole-foods-fascism_n_2496603.html" target="_blank">He then told HuffPost Live</a> that he regretted making that comparison. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)




  • Papa John's


    <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/07/papa-johns-obamacare-pizza_n_1752126.html" target="_blank">John Schnatter, CEO of Papa John's</a>, said in August that Obamacare will cost the company $0.11 to $0.14 per pizza. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-h-schnatter/papa-johns-obamacare_b_2166209.html" target="_blank">But he has maintained</a> that Papa John's offers and will continue to offer health insurance to all of its employees. (Photo by Diane Bondareff/Invision for Papa John's International/AP Images)




  • Cheesecake Factory


    <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/04/cheesecake-factory-ceo-david-overton-obamacare_n_2236673.html" target="_blank">David Overton, CEO of the Cheesecake Factory, told CBS</a> in December that Obamacare "will be very costly" and "most people will have to [raise prices] or cheapen their product" in response. Dina Barmasse-Gray, the Cheesecake Factory's senior vice president of human resources, said in a statement to The Huffington Post: "We have the highest regard for the wellbeing of our staff members, and have offered health insurance to our staff members who work at least 25 hours per week for many years. Because of our long history of providing health benefits, and based on our current analysis of the new requirements, we do not believe the Affordable Health Care Act will have a material impact on us."




  • Boeing


    <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324392804578358540464713464.html" target="_blank">Boeing lobbied unsuccessfully</a> against a new Obamacare fee, according to the Wall Street Journal. And it is generally concerned about Obamacare's costs. "Boeing agrees with the intent of the Affordability Care Act – to provide increased access to coverage, to improve quality, and in the long run, to help manage the overall cost of the health care system," Boeing spokesman Joseph Tedino said in a statement provided to The Huffington Post in March. "However, while the details and implications of the ACA continue to emerge, the net financial impact to Boeing since the inception of law and for the foreseeable future is negative." (Photo by Tim Sloan/AFP/Getty Images)




  • CKE (Owner Of Hardee's)


    <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-09-21/hardee-s-owner-ceo-says-2012-ipo-unlikely-as-costs-rise" target="_blank">Andrew Puzder, CEO of CKE, told</a> Bloomberg Businessweek last year that he plans to respond to Obamacare by selling cheaper meats and hiring more part-time workers. <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/Hardee-s-CEO-Obamacare-Puzder/2012/09/20/id/456919" target="_blank">He also told Newsmax</a> he plans to build fewer restaurants in response. (Photo by Erik S. Lesser/Getty Images)




  • Jimmy John's


    <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/jimmy-johns-ceo-obamacare_n_2137679.html" target="_blank">Jimmy John's CEO Jimmy John Liautaud told Fox News</a> last year that he plans to cut his workers' hours in order to avoid having to offer them health insurance under Obamacare. "We have to bring them down to 28 hours [per week]," he said. "There's no other way we can survive it."