logo
Part D Late Enrollment Penalty

Part D Late Enrollment Penalty

Health Line12-05-2025

You can sign up for a Medicare Part D drug plan when initially eligible for Original Medicare. There's a 3-month period starting when your Medicare parts A and B become active. During this time, you can enroll in Medicare Part D without a late enrollment fee.
Your monthly Part D premium includes a late enrollment penalty if you miss this time frame. This penalty is 1% of the average monthly prescription premium cost for each month you delay enrollment. In total, this works out to 12% annually.
How does Medicare calculate my Part D late enrollment penalty?
Medicare determines the late enrollment penalty by taking 1% of the national base beneficiary premium, which is $36.78 in 2025, and multiplying it by the number of months you spend without coverage.
Then, Medicare rounds this amount to the nearest 10 cents and adds it to your Part D monthly premium. Medicare recalculates this amount annually using the base premium amount for that year.
How long do I pay the Medicare Part D late enrollment penalty?
This additional charge is permanent, and every monthly premium includes it for as long as you have Medicare Part D coverage and don't enroll in a Medicare drug plan when you initially become eligible for Original Medicare.
You also incur it if you're eligible for Medicare and go 63 days or longer without creditable drug coverage. Once you enroll in a Medicare drug plan, the plan can inform you of your premium amount and whether a penalty is applicable.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

APPs Can Improve Population Health And Reduce Costs – It's Time We Set Them Free To Do It!
APPs Can Improve Population Health And Reduce Costs – It's Time We Set Them Free To Do It!

Forbes

time31 minutes ago

  • Forbes

APPs Can Improve Population Health And Reduce Costs – It's Time We Set Them Free To Do It!

Putting small healthcare clinics inside drug, grocery, and big-box retail outlets staffed by APPs provides consumers with easy access to high-quality acute/episodic and preventive care at affordable prices. An Advanced Practice Provider (APP) is a licensed healthcare professional who is not a physician but is educated, trained, and authorized to perform many of the same activities as physicians. APPs are increasingly integral to healthcare delivery, and include nurse practitioners (NPs), physician assistants (PAs), certified nurse midwives (CNMs), certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), and clinical nurse specialists (CNSs). More than two decades ago, in 2002, I had an idea that putting small healthcare clinics inside drug, grocery, and big-box retail outlets that were staffed by APPs would provide consumers with easy access to high-quality, acute/episodic, and preventive care at affordable prices. In the process of researching the viability of this idea (which turned into RediClinic), I contacted a nurse practitioner at Columbia University's School of Nursing named Mary Mundinger (DrPH). Dr, Mundinger was one of a number of prominent nurse practitioners and other nursing advocates (including Tine Hansen-Turton, J.D., who joined me and others in co-founding the Convenient Care Association in 2006) who had pioneered independent practice for nurse practitioners in the 90's – that is, the ability to practice at the top of their licenses without physician supervision. My meeting with Dr. Mundinger was both pleasant and productive, as she shared an extensive amount of research establishing that the quality of care provided by NPs was comparable to that provided by physicians, particularly in primary care. More than 50 independent studies have now confirmed this conclusion. Here's how the American Enterprise Institute put it in one of them: Can NPs provide health care of comparable quality to that provided by primary care physicians? Our studies showed that beneficiaries who received their primary care from NPs consistently received significantly higher-quality care than physicians' patients in several respects. While beneficiaries treated by physicians received slightly better services in a few realms, the differences were marginal. These results held when vulnerable populations of Medicare beneficiaries were analyzed separately and compared to those cared for by physicians, aligning with the findings of many other studies conducted over the past four decades. I thought Dr. Mundinger would be excited by the prospect of a new model based on care delivery by NPs, and she was to some degree. However, she was quick to point out that the limited scope of practice I envisioned for NPs at RediClinic – in order to ensure that patients with routine medical needs could be treated in time periods that were predictably brief – would not allow them to practice at the top of their licenses. For purposes of this article, I am focusing on NPs and PAs (both Master's Prepared), and the increased role they could play in increasing access to healthcare and reducing costs if the 23 states that don't currently allow independent NP practice and the much larger number that don't allow the PA version of it would change course – particularly in light of the significant and growing shortage of primary care physicians. However, you can see from the following chart that there are many different kinds of APPs, and that the one thing they share is the significant amount of education (minimum of six years, not including supervised clinical experience) required to achieve their respective licenses. There are many different kinds of APPs, and the one thing they share is a significant amount of education. While there have been some suggestions in the media that the educational institutions that license APPs may not be rigorous enough, there is a multi-level process in place to ensure that graduates are properly prepared. While acknowledging Dr. Mundinger's position that NPs should be allowed to practice at the top of their licenses without physician supervision, I found in my home state of Texas (and many other states in which RediClinic subsequently operated) that the regulations governing NP and PA practice were much more of an obstacle to full practice authority than any I had contemplated for RediClinic. In general, the NP and PA regulations in Texas were unnecessary, costly, and difficult to justify given the state's well-documented shortage of primary care physicians and the resulting public health issues. When we launched RediClinic in H-E-B grocery stores in Texas, a physician had to be on site 20% of the time our APPs were practicing, and each of these 'oversight physicians' (who had to be paid but did not provide patient care) were only allowed to supervise a maximum of four NPs or PAs. Over the next few years, we were able to convince regulators to reduce the on-site requirement to 10% and then eliminate it entirely. However, it was a waste of valuable healthcare resources in the interim, and today – more than 20 years later – the physician supervision requirement remains, in spite of extensive evidence that barriers to independent APP practice restrict access to care while doing nothing to improve the quality of it. And Texas is not alone in unnecessarily restricting the ability of NPs and PAs to practice at the tops of their licenses without physician supervision, which, among other things, adds about $8,000 annually to the cost of NP and PA practices. In a recent ranking by the Convenient Care Association, 27 U.S. states received a grade of 'D' or 'F' based on their levels of NP, PA, and other APP provider autonomy. In a national survey by the Mellman Group, 31% of Americans said they had to wait an 'unreasonably' long time to get an appointment with a healthcare professional. In Texas, 44% of patients said they had to wait one to two months, and 38% said they had to wait over two months for an appointment. The main reason for these unacceptably long wait times for primary care, which has been shown to be a key driver of healthcare costs, is that our nation has a significant shortage of primary care physicians, a trend that is projected to worsen over the coming decade. The increasing supply of NPs and PAs could offset this primary care shortfall if their capabilities were fully utilized. This means finally giving NPs, PAs, and other APPs the ability to practice at the tops of their licenses, without the need for burdensome and unnecessary physician oversight. None of this is intended to diminish in any way the central role that primary care and other physicians play in our nation's healthcare delivery system, or to discourage teamwork among physicians and other healthcare professionals. However, there are simply not enough physicians to go around, the shortage is projected to worsen, and we can't afford to hang onto outmoded and inefficient care delivery models when the APP solution is staring us in the face.

Lawsuit against Denver's Purina plant talks out about stench, impact on community
Lawsuit against Denver's Purina plant talks out about stench, impact on community

CBS News

time41 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Lawsuit against Denver's Purina plant talks out about stench, impact on community

Another lawsuit has been filed against Nestle's Purina plant in Denver, located along I-70 and York Street. This time, 2,000 homeowners say the stench coming from the plant has impacted their lives in a serious way. Summer is a time in which many people take advantage of the outdoors, but for one neighborhood in the Denver metro area, stepping outside is more of a hassle than a privilege. Denver's Purina plant CBS "Vulgar and puke that dried in the sun," said Cole Guffey. "It almost burns your eyes or throat." That is the description Guffey gives for the foul odor he smells multiple times a week when he steps out of his home in the Elyria-Swansea neighborhood. "It's so bad that you cannot be outside, you don't really have a choice," said Guffey. Guffey's been facing this nightmare for the last five years since moving here, a neighborhood that sits adjacent to the Nestle Purina food plant. "I think it's probably one of the most prevalent staple conversations that everybody has, 'How's the smell?'" he said. For many people living in the neighborhood, concerns with the smell coming from the plant have lingered much longer. The property has been a part of the area since 1930. "It definitely makes it a nuisance to live around here," said Kevin Kerr, whose family owns a business near the food plant. "Property value I can understand it not being that high because of the smell, which sucks for the people, especially my uncle, because he's trying to sell [a] house right now." Residents of Denver's Elyria-Swansea neighborhood have filed a lawsuit against Nestle's Purina plant. CBS The issue has become such a nuisance to people's lives, and the value of their property has become so great that Guffey joined in on a class action lawsuit against the pet food company on June 4. "Just to represent everyone," he said about being one of the named plaintiffs in the lawsuit. "I think the smell can be contained. It could be diluted if they use the proper equipment to do so." The lawsuit alleges the company has negligently constructed and maintained the facility in such a way that's caused noxious odors to invade neighboring homes. "It's hard to find a place to rent in Denver," said Guffey. "So that's what's kept me here." This is not the first time a lawsuit has recently been filed against the food plant by residents in the neighborhood. The same law firm that filed the latest suit also filed one on May 28, 2024. That case was dismissed late last month, but neither Guffey's attorney nor legal documents provided any information as to why the plaintiffs then dismissed the case. A spokesperson for Nestle Purnia tells CBS Colorado they cannot comment on the specifics of pending litigation with this latest lawsuit, but they did issue this statement: "Purina is a proud member of the Denver community, and we've operated our York Street factory since 1930. Throughout this time, we have remained committed to being the best neighbor we can be, and that won't change." Denver's Purina plant at I-70 and York Street. CBS Guffey, however, says the residents here are determined to see Purnia make changes that will keep the smell away. "Any sort of containment would just be super helpful," he said.

More than a dozen Massachusetts beaches are closed for swimming today. See the list.
More than a dozen Massachusetts beaches are closed for swimming today. See the list.

CBS News

time42 minutes ago

  • CBS News

More than a dozen Massachusetts beaches are closed for swimming today. See the list.

Thursday is expected to be the hottest day of the year so far for many in Massachusetts, with temperatures soaring into the 90s around Boston. If you're planning to beat the heat by heading to the beach, you'll want to check first to make sure your favorite swimming spot is open. The Department of Public Health publishes a daily dashboard of beach closures in the state. On Thursday there were more than a dozen beaches closed for swimming due to bacteria levels or other reasons. One notable entry on the list is Walden Pond's main beach, which is closed all summer because of construction work on a new bathhouse. Take a look below at today's beach closures, which was last updated at 9 a.m. Thursday. List of beach closures in Massachusetts today Damon Pond Beach, Ashby (Bacterial Exceedance) Walden Pond - Main, Concord (Other) Richard P. Sharon Beach, Marlboro (Bacterial Exceedance) Miacomet Pond, Nantucket (Harmful Cyanobacteria Bloom) Short Beach, Revere (Bacterial Exceedance) Collins Cove, Salem (Bacterial Exceedance) Juniper Point, Salem (Bacterial Exceedance) Steps Beach, Salem (Other) Peckham Pond at Cape Nihan, Saugus (Bacterial Exceedance) Beamans Pond, Templeton (Bacterial Exceedance) Pearl Hill Pond Beach, Townsend (Bacterial Exceedance) Crow Hill Pond Beach, Westminster (Bacterial Exceedance) Donovans Beach, Winthrop (Bacterial Exceedance) Halford Beach, Winthrop (Bacterial Exceedance) Why are beaches closed in Massachusetts? How does bacteria get in the water? According to health experts, it can enter through stormwater run-off, malfunctioning septic systems and sewer overflows, wildlife and pet waste or agricultural runoff. Swimming in water with unsafe bacteria levels can result in gastrointestinal or respiratory illness, as well as skin rash and itching. Cleanest beaches around Boston A recent report from Save The Harbor/Save The Bay declared that South Boston has some of the cleanest urban beaches in the country. Pleasure Beach and City Point got the highest marks, and Nantasket, M Street and Carson beaches also scored well. The report also said Wollaston Beach in Quincy continues to improve after upgrading their stormwater and sewer systems in recent years.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store