On September 11, 2026, Connecticut approved average 2027 increases of 11.3% for individual plans and 15.1% for small-group plans. The department had received requests for 16.2% and 17.8%, respectively. The paired decision is useful evidence for comparison, but it is not proof that an ICHRA costs less than group coverage. source
What Connecticut approved
The Connecticut Insurance Department finalized rate decisions for fully insured individual and small-group plans, both on and off the exchange. It reviewed five filings from four insurers and reported that its changes reduced projected premiums by more than $100 million compared with the requested rates. The department's approximately 220,000 enrollment figure combines the two markets; it is not the denominator for either percentage. source
Why the paired decision is useful
Because the same regulator finalized both markets at the same time, the decision gives a small employer a concrete starting point for asking how its renewal market is moving. The individual and small-group percentages still describe different products, populations and rating structures. They cannot be compared as if they were two quotes for the same workforce.
How this connects to ICHRA
An ICHRA comparison depends on the local individual-market plan available to each employee, the employer's contribution and the affordability analysis. HealthCare.gov points to the employee's self-only lowest-cost Silver premium as one of the inputs. A state average can tell you why a refresh is timely; it cannot supply that employee-level number. source
The 2027 federal required contribution percentage is 10.22%. Keep that federal threshold separate from Connecticut's market averages. source
A better comparison for a small employer
Build the comparison with the same workforce assumptions on both sides: employee locations and ages, current group renewal cost, proposed contribution classes, local lowest-cost Silver premiums, expected employee premium remainder, administrator fees, network needs and implementation work.
The useful output is a range of scenarios with dated inputs, not a single claim that one coverage structure always wins. The total-cost guide, evaluation brief and 2027 planning outlook provide the next worksheets for that work.
What this decision does not prove
It does not establish that ICHRA is cheaper than a Connecticut small-group plan, that every county or age will move by the market average, or that 2027 lowest-cost Silver premiums changed by 11.3%. It also does not establish a national ICHRA trend. Those questions require plan-level and employee-level data.
What employers should collect next
- the group renewal proposal and plan-year dates;
- employee rating areas, ages and classes;
- dated local lowest-cost Silver benchmarks;
- the 2027 contribution and affordability method;
- administrator fees, enrollment workflow and employee support responsibilities.
Practical conclusion
Connecticut's paired rate decision is a useful market checkpoint. Use it to reopen the comparison and gather local plan evidence, then let the workforce model—not the headline percentages—drive the decision.
Sources and evidence
Review dates are recorded for each source above. Company pages are useful for confirming how a product is described, but they do not prove service quality or customer results.