I have two options for my healthcare provided through work. My employer covers 100% of the monthly premiums for both, and the premiums would be essentially identical anyway (within $2/month), so that is not a determining factor. The out-of-pocket maximum is also identical between the two.
- Option A, which I have been using thus far, has a lower deductible (per person $1000, whole family $3000), with a small copay ($45) on some services (primary care, urgent care, ~$15 on Rx) and 30%-50% coinsurance on all other services.
- Option B has a much higher deductible (per person $2400, family $4800) but 0% coinsurance and $0 copay (after deductible) on most services (but no cost to me at all for preventative expenses).
I have read that a 0% coinsurance is essentially always the better option. However, for a family of 4, having never reached even our $3000 family deductible in previous years, it seems like the 0% coinsurance isn't worth the higher deductible. Let's assume that I won't suddenly have unexpected huge medical bills (I know, I know, that's the point of insurance, but I'm ignoring the unknown for simplicity).
Question: Is the 0% coinsurance unequivocally a better option? If not, under what circumstances would it be a better option?
(Not to muddy the waters, but there are also HSA versions of these options, but I don't want to look into these options at this time; to answer a question: my employer does not contribute to the HSA)