During a decade of debate on how best to fund long-term care, British analysts have focused more on policy developments in other countries than ever before. Discussing criteria for appraising options, the paper argues that the objectives of the financing system must be considered in the light of the objectives for the long-term care system as a whole. The types of funding mechanisms discussed are private insurance, including private/public partnerships, tax-funded and social insurance models. The differences between tax-funded and social insurance models are discussed. Social insurance with hypothecation of funds is no longer part of the current debate, which now focuses on the three types of options whose properties are described in the paper: free personal care (adopted in Scotland), the retention of means-tested arrangements in some form, and a partnership model as recommended in the Wanless report. The paper agrees with the Wanless report that all three have strengths and weaknesses. Decision-makers have a window of opportunity to make reforms before the baby-boomers reach late old age
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.