# Major Companies to Cut Back on 2027 Health Benefits in Blow to Workers
## Overview of the 2027 Health Benefit Rollbacks
Health benefits have long been a deciding factor in whether Americans accept or remain in a job, but a wave of major employers is preparing to scale back coverage in 2027—making that decision significantly harder for workers. Walt Disney, Bloomberg, Starbucks, Deloitte, and the City of Dallas are among the organizations taking steps next year to rein in health care spending, ranging from restricting spousal coverage and eliminating plan options to cutting drug benefits and reducing paid leave. These moves come as health plans project the highest medical cost trend in nearly two decades. Consulting firm PwC expects commercial health care costs to rise 9% in 2027, while insurer Aon predicts U.S. employer health care costs will climb 9.5%, pushing average costs above $19,000 per employee.
## What Each Company Is Changing
The specific cutbacks vary widely across employers. Walt Disney Co. will stop covering working spouses under its health care plan in 2027 if those spouses have access to coverage through their own employers—a change affecting more than 200,000 U.S. employees. Starbucks surprised workers at open enrollment by nearly doubling health insurance premiums for some employees while lowering its share of employer contributions, and it is ending coverage for GLP-1 weight loss drugs beginning in October. Bloomberg LP plans to require employees to pay monthly premium contributions for the first time in company history. Deloitte will halve paid parental leave to eight weeks for workers in its „Center” talent segment—covering internal IT, finance, and administrative functions—effective Jan. 1, while also ending its $50,000 adoption and surrogacy reimbursement program (which covered IVF-related costs) and pension accruals after Dec. 31. The Dallas City Council was set to vote on a proposal to eliminate its copay insurance plan and end GLP-1 coverage for employees using the medication for weight loss.
## The Financial Toll on Workers
These benefit cuts could be devastating for employees who must shoulder more of their own health costs, especially given that many Americans already report limited budgets for insurance outside an employer-sponsored plan. According to finance researcher ValuePenguin, 42% of 2,001 adults surveyed in July said they could comfortably afford less than $100 a month for health insurance, while 23% could afford between $100 and $249. The stakes are high: among those employed or job hunting, 87% say the health plan attached to a job matters at least somewhat when deciding whether to take a job or stay. Consulting firm Marsh found that 59% of employers plan cost-cutting changes to health benefits in 2027, including plan design changes like higher deductibles that increase out-of-pocket costs, and about two of three large employers with 500 or more employees are expected to raise employees’ share of premium costs next year.
## Why Cost-Shifting Isn’t a Real Solution
Critics argue that shifting costs to employees does nothing to address the underlying problem. As Tim Zellers, an employee benefits consultant at Gibson, noted on LinkedIn, „These moves may reduce employer spend, but reducing benefits isn’t the same as reducing the cost of health care. We’re just changing who pays for it.” Some experts suggest companies need an entirely new strategy—potentially „exiting the traditional insurance game.” Paul Pruitt, co-founder of SHARx, points out that pharmacy costs continue to outpace overall medical trends, with higher-cost medications often representing just 10% of usage but consuming 90% of dollars. One emerging alternative is individual coverage health reimbursement arrangements (ICHRAs), which let employers provide fixed monthly tax-free reimbursements for individual health insurance premiums. According to the Employee Benefits Research Institute, one in three businesses currently offering health benefits reported likely ICHRA adoption within the next two years—though transitioning may prove difficult, as employees tend to favor familiar group plans and uncertainty remains about whether ICHRAs would truly be cheaper for workers.
Ez a cikk a Neural News AI (V1) verziójával készült.