Why This Landed on My Radar
MedPAC just dropped numbers that confirm what we’ve all suspected: Medicare Advantage plans are still getting paid $76 billion more than traditional Medicare would spend on the same patients-even after recent oversight improvements. That’s billion with a “B,” and while that gap has narrowed thanks to changes in how risk scores are audited, it’s still massive. For those of us competing with MA plans for patients or watching our FFS Medicare revenue shrink, this isn’t just policy wonk territory-it’s about understanding where the money’s flowing and why our MA patients come with so much administrative baggage.
Here’s What’s Going On
The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) released findings showing that the payment gap between Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare has decreased, largely due to something called the V28 standard-a more rigorous way of auditing the diagnosis codes that MA plans submit to inflate their risk-adjusted payments. Despite this improvement in oversight, MA plans are still receiving $76 billion more than what the same beneficiaries would cost in traditional Medicare.
For context, Medicare Advantage plans get paid based on how sick their patients appear on paper. The sicker the diagnosis codes, the higher the per-member payment. For years, critics have argued that MA plans game this system through aggressive coding practices, capturing every possible diagnosis to maximize revenue while traditional Medicare physicians code conservatively. The V28 methodology was designed to crack down on this by more accurately validating diagnoses, and it’s working-the gap has narrowed. But $76 billion still represents a significant transfer of taxpayer money to private insurers for care that may not cost that much more to deliver.
What This Means for Your Practice
Here’s where this hits home: in Texas, MA penetration is climbing fast, especially in our metros. Nearly 40% of Medicare beneficiaries in Houston and Dallas are now in MA plans, and those plans bring Prior Authorization hell, narrow networks, and payment delays we don’t see with traditional Medicare. Meanwhile, these same plans are collecting premium payments from CMS based on risk scores that-according to MedPAC-still overstate actual costs by $76 billion nationally.
For independent practices, this creates a brutal dynamic. We’re pressured to join MA networks because that’s where the patients are, but the administrative burden is crushing. We spend hours fighting denials for services that would be automatically covered under traditional Medicare. We hire additional staff just to navigate the PA requirements. And while MA plans pocket the risk-adjusted payments, they squeeze us on reimbursement rates-often paying less than traditional Medicare while demanding more documentation.
The V28 auditing standard is making it harder for plans to inflate risk scores with questionable diagnoses, which is good for taxpayers but may actually make things harder for us. As plans face more scrutiny on their coding, they’re going to push that burden downstream onto providers. Expect more aggressive chart reviews, more demands for documentation supporting every diagnosis, and more retroactive denials when auditors question whether a patient truly had that HCC-generating condition.
Here’s the other angle: if you’re doing your own risk adjustment coding for MA patients, you might actually be leaving money on the table by coding conservatively while plans are optimized to capture every dollar. The gap exists partly because MA plans employ armies of coders and use sophisticated tech to mine charts for billable diagnoses. Most independent practices don’t have those resources, which means we’re delivering care to high-risk patients but not getting compensated accordingly because we’re not playing the coding game at the same level.
Without Medicaid expansion in Texas, we’re already dealing with a difficult payer mix. The shift to MA compounds this because these plans consume more resources per patient while often paying less. The $76 billion gap isn’t coming to our practices-it’s staying with the insurance companies.
Key Takeaways
- Medicare Advantage plans still receive $76B more annually than traditional Medicare would spend on the same patients, even after improved auditing
- The V28 standard has narrowed the gap but will likely push more aggressive documentation demands onto providers
- MA penetration in Texas metros is approaching 40%, making these payment dynamics critical to practice viability
- Plans use sophisticated coding technology to maximize risk-adjusted payments-most independent practices don’t have equivalent tools
- The administrative burden of MA (PAs, denials, appeals) costs practices real money while plans capture the upside from inflated risk scores
What Smart Practices Are Doing
Forward-thinking practices are getting serious about their own risk adjustment game-not to game the system, but to ensure they’re accurately capturing the complexity of patients they’re actually treating. They’re investing in coding education, conducting quarterly chart audits to identify missed HCCs, and some are deploying technology that flags documentation gaps in real time. They’re also getting much more selective about which MA contracts they sign, doing the math on whether the patient volume justifies the administrative cost.
Source
“Oversight shrinks Medicare Advantage payment gap to $76B: MedPAC” - Modern Healthcare
Primary Care Perspective delivers curated intelligence from trusted healthcare sources.
© 2026 Primary Care Perspective | Texas Edition