The increasing prevalence of private health insurance (PHI) in tax-funded healthcare systems challenges the principles of equity and universalism. A significant proportion of PHI holders in such systems receive their insurance as an employment benefit, granting them access to privately funded healthcare alongside the publicly funded system. This dual access raises critical questions about how individuals navigate between the two sectors and how their experiences shape their perceptions of public healthcare. The aim of this study is to explore how the use of PHI-funded healthcare services influences perceptions of and satisfaction with the public healthcare system. Specifically, we examine when PHI holders choose privately funded care over public services, how they perceive the two sectors, and whether they would purchase PHI independently if it were not offered as an employment benefit. An interview study was conducted in 2022 with 19 individuals in Sweden who receive PHI as an employment benefit. Using thematic analysis, the findings reveal a preference for privately funded services due to faster access and higher service quality. However, the medical quality of specialised care in the public sector is still regarded as high. PHI is perceived as providing a sense of security through prompt care, but few respondents expressed a willingness to purchase it privately, suggesting it is seen more as a convenience than a necessity. These findings highlight the role of PHI in shaping expectations and satisfaction within tax-funded healthcare systems, offering insights into its potential impact on public trust and support of universal healthcare.