Prices (Fares, Fees and Rates)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Congress Presses Health Insurance Regulators on ‘Troubling’ Billing Tactics

      by

      Lawmakers are zeroing in on MultiPlan, a firm that has helped insurers cut payments while sometimes leaving patients with large bills.Lawmakers on Tuesday called on health insurance regulators to detail their efforts against “troubling practices” that have raised costs for patients and employers.In a letter to a top Labor Department official, two congressmen cited a New York Times investigation of MultiPlan, a data firm that works with insurance companies to recommend payments for medical care.The firm and the insurers can collect higher fees when payments to medical providers are lower, but patients can be stuck with large bills, the investigation found. At the same time, employers can be charged high fees — in some cases paying insurers and MultiPlan more for processing a claim than the doctor gets for treating the patient.The lawmakers, Representatives Bobby Scott of Virginia and Mark DeSaulnier of California, both Democrats in leadership positions on a House committee overseeing employer-based insurance, highlighted MultiPlan as an example of “opaque fee structures and alleged self-dealing” that drive up health care costs. In their letter, they pressed the department for details on its efforts to enforce rules meant to promote transparency and expose conflicts of interest.MultiPlan’s business model focuses on the most common way Americans get health coverage: through an employer that “self-funds,” meaning it pays medical claims with its own money and uses an insurance company to process claims. Insurers such as Aetna, Cigna and UnitedHealthcare have pitched MultiPlan’s services as a way to save money when an employee sees a provider out of network.In many cases, MultiPlan uses an algorithm-based tool to generate a recommended payment. Employers typically pay insurers and MultiPlan a percentage of what they call the “savings” — the difference between the recommendation and the original bill.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      New Real Estate Rules Sow Confusion, at Least in Short Term

      by

      Changes in how real estate commissions are advertised and paid went into effect this weekend. Buyers and even some agents aren’t sure what they mean.An hour before the open house on Saturday afternoon, a real estate agent paced across the dark bamboo floors, straightening the throw blanket, fluffing the pillows and lighting a scented candle.The last-minute sprucing at the $1.2 million condo in Jersey City, N.J., was exactly what agents have done at open houses for decades before this weekend.The difference now is the information they are required to disclose and where they can disclose it when it comes to real estate commissions — a charge that had hovered between 5 to 6 percent of the sales price, and until now was typically paid by the seller and split between the seller’s agent and the buyer’s agent.The changes that went into effect this weekend decouple the two commissions: Sellers are no longer expected to pay buyers’ commissions, though they can still choose to do so, and the proposed commission split can no longer be advertised on the online database commonly used to sell homes, the M.L.S.The new rules went into effect across the United States as part of a $418 million settlement agreement with the National Association of Realtors, a powerful real estate trade group that was successfully sued by a group of homeowners in Missouri who argued that the longtime practice requiring them to pay agents’ commissions led to inflated fees. Brokerages have spent months trying to educate agents and consumers on the looming changes.But when they were implemented nationwide this Saturday, buyers remained befuddled.Sarthak Jain, left, and his wife, Aditi Maheshwari, touring a duplex in Jersey City alongside their Realtor.Andres Kudacki for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Harris y Trump presentan un claro contraste sobre la economía

      by

      Ambos candidatos abogan por ampliar el poder del gobierno para dirigir los resultados económicos, pero en ámbitos muy diferentes.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]La vicepresidenta Kamala Harris y el expresidente Donald Trump volaron a Carolina del Norte esta semana para pronunciar lo que se anunciaron como importantes discursos sobre la economía. Ninguno de los dos expuso un plan detallado de políticas: ni Harris, que se centró durante media hora en la vivienda, los comestibles y los medicamentos con receta, ni Trump, que durante 80 minutos desperdigó varias propuestas entre reflexiones en voz alta sobre inmigrantes peligrosos.Pero ambos candidatos, cada uno a su manera, enviaron a los votantes mensajes claros e importantes sobre sus visiones económicas. Cada uno de ellos defendió la visión de un gobierno federal poderoso, uno que utilice su poder para intervenir en los mercados en busca de una economía más fuerte y próspera.Solo discreparon, casi por completo, sobre cuándo y cómo debe utilizarse ese poder.El viernes en Raleigh, Harris empezó a imprimir su propio sello a la economía progresista que ha dominado la política demócrata en la última década. Este pensamiento económico abraza la idea de que el gobierno federal debe actuar con agresividad para fomentar la competencia y corregir las distorsiones en los mercados privados.El planteamiento busca grandes subidas de impuestos a las empresas y a quienes obtienen ingresos altos, para financiar la ayuda a los trabajadores de ingresos bajos y de clase media que luchan por crear riqueza para sí mismos y para sus hijos. Al mismo tiempo, ofrece grandes exenciones fiscales a las empresas que se dedican a lo que Harris y otros progresistas consideran un gran beneficio económico, como la fabricación de tecnologías necesarias para luchar contra el calentamiento global o la construcción de viviendas asequibles.Esta filosofía anima la agenda política que Harris presentó el viernes. Se comprometió a entregar hasta 25.000 dólares en ayudas al pago inicial a cada comprador de primera vivienda durante cuatro años, al tiempo que destinaría 40.000 millones de dólares a empresas constructoras de primeras viviendas. Harris afirmó que reinstauraría de forma permanente el crédito tributario por hijos ampliado que el presidente Biden estableció temporalmente con su ley de estímulo de 2021, al tiempo que ofrecería aún más ayuda a los padres de recién nacidos.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Harris and Trump Offer a Clear Contrast on the Economy

      by

      Both candidates embrace expansions of government power to steer economic outcomes — but in vastly different areas.Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump flew to North Carolina this week to deliver what were billed as major speeches on the economy. Neither laid out a comprehensive policy plan — not Ms. Harris in her half-hour focus on housing, groceries and prescription drugs, nor Mr. Trump in 80 minutes of sprinkling various proposals among musings about dangerous immigrants.But in their own ways, both candidates sent voters clear and important messages about their economic visions. Each embraced a vision of a powerful federal government, using its muscle to intervene in markets in pursuit of a stronger and more prosperous economy.They just disagreed, almost entirely, on when and how that power should be used.In Raleigh on Friday, Ms. Harris began to put her own stamp on the brand of progressive economics that has come to dominate Democratic politics over the last decade. That economic thinking embraces the idea that the federal government must act aggressively to foster competition and correct distortions in private markets.The approach seeks large tax increases on corporations and high earners, to fund assistance for low-income and middle-class workers who are struggling to build wealth for themselves and their children. At the same time, it provides big tax breaks to companies engaged in what Ms. Harris and other progressives see as delivering great economic benefit — like manufacturing technologies needed to fight global warming, or building affordable housing.That philosophy animated the policy agenda that Ms. Harris unveiled on Friday. She pledged to send up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance to every first-time home buyer over four years, while directing $40 billion to construction companies that build starter homes. She said she would permanently reinstate an expanded child tax credit that President Biden temporarily established with his 2021 stimulus law, while offering even more assistance to parents of newborns.She called for a federal ban on corporate price gouging on groceries and for new federal enforcement tools to punish companies that unfairly push up food prices. “My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that exploit crises and break the rules,” she said, adding: “We will help the food industry become more competitive, because I believe competition is the lifeblood of our economy.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 50 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      The Big Number: 2.9%

      by

      The rate of inflation in July on a yearly basis.Inflation slowed in July, the Consumer Price Index showed, increasing 2.9 percent from a year earlier. That was a drop from 3 percent in June, and it marked the first time that inflation had fallen below 3 percent since 2021.Inflation is still higher than the Federal Reserve’s target of 2 percent, but it has fallen well below the high of 9.1 percent reached in June 2022. The report on Wednesday was another data point to suggest that the Fed will cut interest rates when it meets next month.“It doesn’t mean our work is done, but it does mean we’re moving in the right direction, and with a bit of momentum,” Jared Bernstein, chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said in an email after the release of the report.The Fed started raising interest rates in March 2022 to slow demand and bring price pressures under control after a run-up during the Covid-19 pandemic. Since July 2023, the Fed has held rates steady at about 5.3 percent, the highest level in more than two decades.But evidence like Wednesday’s report makes it all the more likely that the central bank will begin cutting rates, especially after the unemployment rate last month ticked up to 4.3 percent. Historically, increases in joblessness like the one in July have been an indicator of a recession.Still, consumer spending has remained robust while the economy has continued to grow.Can the growth continue? That is the unanswered question at the moment.“The government is taking action to ensure that these products do not turn the dream of homeownership into a nightmare.”Rohit Chopra, the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, on the agency’s intention to crack down on seller-financed home sales, a predatory practice.“You can’t compare a machine-made cookie with a handmade cookie. It’s like comparing a Rolls-Royce with a Volkswagen.”Wally Amos, the creator of the cookie brand Famous Amos, said in an interview with MSNBC in 2007. He died Tuesday.“We took what people thought were Tubi’s perceived weaknesses — older content, no stars, lower-budget movies — and we made it our strength.”Nicole Parlapiano, Tubi’s marketing chief, on how Tubi has become one of the most popular streaming services.

      .nytapp-hybrid-article h1, article h1 {
      font-size: 2.5rem !important;
      font-style: inherit !important;
      line-height: 1.4 !important;
      font-weight: 400 !important;
      margin-top: -1rem !important;
      } More

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The Price of Getting Inked

      by

      Whether it’s the expense of getting tattooed or the cost to have one removed, Americans are paying for their ink.Julia Rothman and Aug. 16, 2024Mike Weiss has at least 70 tattoos, stretching from his shoulders to his ankles. Since getting his first in 2011, he has spent roughly $13,000 on them.Mr. Weiss, 31, a group fitness instructor based in Larchmont, N.Y., is one of millions of Americans who have gotten inked. Once considered countercultural — something for sailors and misfits — tattoos are now culturally ubiquitous: Nearly one-third of American adults have at least one, according to a survey by Pew Research.And business is booming like never before. The global tattoo market, which currently brings in about $2.2 billion, is expected to grow to more than $4 billion by 2032, according to Fortune Business Insights, a market research firm. There are over 20,000 tattoo parlors in the United States. Kari Barba, 64, is a tattoo artist and the owner of Outer Limits, which has two locations in California. She opened her first shop in 1983.

      .img-sz-small {
      max-width: 90px;
      margin: 0 auto;
      }

      .img-sz-small div {
      width: 100%!important;
      max-width: 100%!important;
      }

      @media screen and (min-width: 700px) {
      .img-sz-full {
      max-width: 920px;
      }

      .img-sz-small {
      max-width: 110px;
      margin: 0 auto;
      }

      .img-sz-small div {
      max-width: 100%!important;
      }

      }

      time {
      display: none!important;
      }

      section time {
      display: inline-block!important;
      }

      We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      NJ Transit Riders to Get a Fare Holiday After Summer of Delays

      by

      After a spate of breakdowns that caused long delays, an unscheduled “fare holiday” on the statewide transit network will start on Aug. 26.After struggling to provide reliable service to commuters this spring and summer, New Jersey Transit is giving its customers free rides for a week, Gov. Philip D. Murphy announced on Thursday.The unusual “fare holiday” on all modes of the agency’s statewide transit network, which will run from Aug. 26 through Sept. 2, comes less than two months after New Jersey Transit raised all of its fares by 15 percent. The increase received heavy criticism from customers and elected officials.Mr. Murphy and state transportation officials argued that the fare increase was necessary to close a gap of more than $100 million in the agency’s budget. Additional annual increases of 3 percent are scheduled.Mr. Murphy, a Democrat, said in a statement that the fare holiday was a “thank you” to the agency’s loyal customers for enduring a period when “transit service has not consistently met their expectations — or our own.”During an appearance on “Good Day New York” on Fox 5 New York, the governor said, more plainly: “It’s been a really ugly summer. I think June was one of the worst months we’ve had.”Critics immediately took to social media to carp about the choice of the week leading up to Labor Day, a time when many commuters are on vacation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      2026 Prices for Drugs That Are Subject to Negotiations

      by

      The prices were made possible by the Inflation Reduction Act, which granted the health secretary the authority to negotiate on behalf of Medicare.The Biden administration on Thursday announced the results of negotiations between Medicare and pharmaceutical companies over the prices of 10 costly or common medications. The new prices, which will take effect in 2026, are the maximum Medicare Part D plans and patients will pay for a one-month supply.1. Eliquis, for preventing strokes and blood clots, from Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer, $2312. Jardiance, for diabetes and heart failure, from Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly, $1973. Xarelto, for preventing strokes and blood clots, from Johnson & Johnson, $1974. Januvia, for diabetes, from Merck, $1135. Farxiga, for diabetes, heart failure and chronic kidney disease, from AstraZeneca $1786. Entresto, for heart failure, from Novartis, $2957. Enbrel, for autoimmune conditions, from Amgen, $2,3558. Imbruvica, for blood cancers, from AbbVie and Johnson & Johnson, $9,3199. Stelara, for autoimmune conditions, from Johnson & Johnson, $4,69510. Fiasp and NovoLog insulin products, for diabetes, from Novo Nordisk, $119 More