This year has been a busy one for the medical care, pharmaceutical and public health sector — from the COVID-19 pandemic to the controversy over imports of pork containing ractopamine residues. The sensitive issue of raising National Health Insurance (NHI) premiums is also back in the spotlight.
Late last month, Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中) said that the NHI system would face a deficit of NT$67.6 billion (US$2.34 billion) by the end of this year, leaving only 1.88 months of reserve funds.
This is expected to shrink to 0.54 months by the end of next year — below the legally stipulated level — and thus, insurance premiums must be raised, he said, adding that the review process is to start next month.
The government should be praised for its determination to create a financially healthy NHI, but it should make sure that it does the right thing, and that it does it right. If premiums must be raised, the review process should be open and transparent, take the views of the medical and pharmaceutical sectors into consideration, and be clearly communicated to the public.
Even more important, it should muster the courage to use this as an opportunity to adjust the system. NHI reform must not be a knee-jerk reaction: If premiums are raised every time there is a financial shortfall — even if it helps ride out the immediate crisis — there would always be a next time.
Last year, NHI spending was NT$713.9 billion. The second-largest expenditure was on drugs — 27.2 percent, or NT$208.3 billion. Drug expenditure by other countries, such as the US, Japan, Germany and France, varies from 9 to 19 percent. The government needs to take a hard look at why it made up almost one-third of all expenses here.
What makes matters even worse is that total expenditure on medication and the proportion of overall spending have increased every year. In 2016, medication was 26 percent of overall expenditure, or NT$170.2 billion. In just four years, this increased by more than NT$30 billion. The problem is getting increasingly severe and can no longer be ignored.
Adjusting medication expenditure entails several key aspects. First, Article 61 of the National Health Insurance Act (全民健康保險法) should be implemented and drug expenses be itemized, and a careful financial estimate made of these expenses.
The issue of establishing a reasonable difference between what healthcare providers pay pharmaceutical firms for drugs and the amount they report to the National Health Insurance Bureau, and not including non-prescription drugs in the NHI, must also be addressed.
According to estimates by the Control Yuan, the bureau defines 15 percent as a reasonable price difference, but the actual difference obtained by hospitals and clinics can be as high as 27 to 42 percent. Based on this estimate, resolving this problem would mean cutting NHI expenses by NT$40.6 billion each year.
Japan, for example, defines 2 percent as a reasonable price difference, and in practice, it is between 6 and 9 percent. If Taiwan could achieve the same standard as Japan, the NHI could save between NT$61 billion and NT$67.6 billion every year, equal to the estimated shortfall this year.
Furthermore, implementing Article 51 of the NHI act according to which non-prescription drugs are not covered by the NHI, would save another NT$1.7 billion annually.
Raising premiums to increase NHI income is one way to look at the problem, but discussing the huge drug expenditure and working hard to cut it is more important.
Huang Jin-shun is president of the Federation of Taiwan Pharmacists Associations.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing