Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts

Friday, March 5, 2021

Sign-ups for Biden's Obamacare special enrollment period nearly triple

 More than 206,000 people signed up for Affordable Care Act policies on the federal exchange in the first two weeks of the special enrollment period ordered by President Joe Biden, federal data released Wednesday shows.


Uninsured Americans who want to buy 2021 coverage on healthcare.gov could start doing so on February 15, thanks to an executive order Biden signed in January. Special enrollment runs until May 15. Most states that operate their own marketplaces are also extending their enrollment seasons.

"These numbers are an encouraging sign — but we can't slow down until every American has the security and peace of mind that quality, affordable health coverage provides," Biden said.

Typically, signing up for coverage outside of the traditional enrollment period in the fall is restricted to those who lose their job-based policies or have a change in status, such as a divorce. Last year, only 76,000 people picked Obamacare plans during the second half of February, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs the federal exchange.

Excerpt from article By Tami Luhby / CNN

Thursday, September 20, 2018

Maryland Individual Health Insurance Plans Poised for First Rate Reduction

Maryland individuals who purchase health insurance through the state's five-year-old Affordable Care Act exchange are poised to see the first decrease in their premium costs in 2019.

Following federal approval of a program that aims to stabilize the ACA-born insurance market, Kaiser Permanente and CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield are seeking price decreases for their individual market plans. The drop follows four consecutive years of double-digit percentage hikes. Consumer advocacy groups present at a public hearing on Monday lauded insurance officials' efforts around lowering prices, and said the decreases will be a welcome relief for residents who do not qualify for employer-based coverage and must purchase plans through the state's exchange.

The effort was initiated by a piece of bipartisan legislation passed in the Maryland General Assembly earlier this year. Maryland will put hundreds of millions of dollars behind a reinsurance program, which will allow the state's lone two carriers in the individual market to see major cost savings and stave off the need to again increase premium prices in 2019.

The Maryland Insurance Administration said during the hearing it is still finalizing details with the insurers, and plans to release the final 2019 rates later this week. Pending any major adjustments, the rates will look close to this:

CareFirst's individual HMO members will see about a 22.3 percent premium decrease, and a $104 monthly price decrease compared to 2018 rates.

Kaiser's individual HMO members will see about a 6.3 percent premium decrease, about a $23 per month swing from 2018.

CareFirst's individual PPO members — they are generally the sickest and most costly members in the market overall — will see about a 17.7 percent premium increase, which would result in an average price increase of about $121 per month compared to last year's rates.

Prior to the approval of Maryland's reinsurance plan, requested 2019 rates ranged between 18 percent to more than 90 percent increases. Now, insurers are seeking an average 13.9 decrease overall.

Peter Berry, chief actuary at CareFirst, the state's dominant health insurer, said he's scanned through the company's rate trends for the past 20 years. If the decrease is cleared, he said it would mark this first time in that period that some CareFirst members would see a year-over-year decrease in premiums.

"For the first time since I’ve been looking at health insurance since 1985, I’m speechless in a very good way," said Beth Sammis, president of advocacy group Consumer Health First. "This is a good day for consumers."

Sammis said next, industry officials need to put their efforts behind making sure that Maryland individual consumers understand their new options, and actually purchase these plans for the coming year.

Insurance Commissioner Al Redmer said part of the goal of the reinsurance program is to lure consumers who have opted to go without insurance the last few years due to unaffordability back to the market. The more people who pay into in a given insurance risk pool, the greater the price stability for everyone in the pool.

In an excerpt by Morgan Eichensehr  – Reporter, Baltimore Business Journal
Sep 17, 2018, 2:53pm

Tuesday, June 19, 2018

Trump Administration releases final rule on Association Health plans

This afternoon the Trump Administration released a final rule regarding Association Health Plans as well as a fact sheet on the new rule. The rule was in response to an executive order issued by President Trump on October 12 directing federal agencies to expand the availability of AHPs, short-term limited duration insurance policies and Health Reimbursement Arrangements. The proposal calls for a revision to ERISA in order to redefine "employer" to allow more groups to qualify as associations and treating health coverage sponsored by an employer association as a single group health plan that would not be subject to the ACA's essential health benefits.
 
The final rule does not differ much from the proposed rule that came out in January, and the Congressional Budget Office now estimates that 4 million Americans, including 400,000 who otherwise would lack insurance, will join an AHP by 2023.
 
The goal of the rule is to provide small-business owners, employees of small businesses and family members of working owners/employees more coverage options, more affordable pricing, enhanced ability to self-insure, less regulatory burden and complexity, and reduced administrative costs.
 
The rule does this by eliminating the requirement that an association exist for a bona fide purpose other than offering health coverage. To qualify under the rule, employers would need to be either in the same trade, industry, line of business or profession, or have a principal place of business within a region that does not exceed the boundaries of the same state or the same metropolitan area. Therefore, AHPs could cross state lines if the metropolitan area includes more than one state. These plans would be subject to state regulation of insurance and plans across multiple states could be subject to varying rules. The Department of Labor has committed to continuing to partner with states to protect consumers and enforce state regulations.
 
Under the final rule, self-employed individuals, sole proprietors and common-law employees would be permitted to join an AHP. These individuals would be treated as an employee of the trade or business for purposes of being covered by the AHP. The proposal includes non-discrimination protections to avoid potential of adverse selection. It would require that the association not restrict membership based on any health factor, as defined in the HIPAA/ACA health nondiscrimination rules. These include health status, medical condition (including both physical and mental illnesses), claims experience, receipt of healthcare, medical history, genetic information, evidence of insurability, and disability.
 
The final rule has staggered dates for implementation:
 
· All associations (new or existing) may establish a fully insured AHP on September 1, 2018.
· Existing associations that sponsored an AHP on or before the date the final rule was published may establish a self-funded AHP on January 1, 2019.
· All other associations (new or existing) may establish a self-funded AHP on April 1, 2019.

 
From NAHU(National Association of Health Underwriters)

Thursday, January 4, 2018

IRS Extends Reporting Due Dates for 1095 Forms Sent to Individuals By ALE's

On Dec. 22, 2017, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced extended deadlines for 2017 Minimum Essential Coverage (Section 6055) and (Applicable) Large Employer (ALE) Shared Responsibility (Section 6056) reporting due to individuals in early 2018. The extended deadlines are as follows:

2017 Forms Sent to Individuals
Original Deadline
Extended Deadline
Form 1095-B
Form 1095-C
1/31/2018
3/2/2018

Employers and insurers are encouraged to provide the forms to individuals as soon as possible, but no later than March 2, 2018. Individuals who file their 2017 federal income tax returns before receiving their 1095-B and 1095-C forms will not be required to amend their income tax returns once they receive their forms. They should keep their forms, once received, with their tax records.

It is important to note the IRS has not extended the due date for filing 2017 Forms 1094-B, 1095-B, 1094-C, or 1095-C with the IRS. The deadline remains February 28, 2018, for those with 250 or fewer forms filing by paper, or April 2, 2018, if filing electronically.


The IRS also extended its transition relief with respect to penalties if good faith efforts are made to comply with information reporting requirements.

From Cigna Healthplan January 4, 2018

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Senate to take up bill to repeal Obamacare without replacement plan

WASHINGTON — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced late Monday that the Senate will give up on its bill to replace Obamacare and vote instead on legislation to repeal the law within two years.
McConnell made the decision after it became clear he could not win enough support from his own GOP senators to pass the latest version of a replacement bill.
Two Republican senators announced Monday night that they would vote against the revised Senate bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, leaving leaders without enough support to bring the bill to the floor.
McConnell responded that he will push the Senate to pass a bill that would repeal the Affordable Care Act – with a two-year delay – as a substitute.
"Regretfully, it is now apparent that the effort to repeal and immediately replace the failure of Obamacare will not be succesful," the Kentucky Republican said in a statement. "So, in the coming days, the Senate will vote to take up the House bill with the first amendment in order being what a majority of the Senate has already supported in 2015 and that was vetoed by then-President Obama: a repeal of Obamacare with a two-year delay to provide for a stable transition period to a patient-centered health care system that gives Americans access to quality, affordable care." 
Contributing: Erin Kelly, USA TODAY

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Maryland Looking At High Premium Increases On Exchange As Cigna Drops Out

The Baltimore Sun  (6/21, Cohn) reports Cigna Health and Life Insurance Co. has decided to not sell plan on the exchange next year as CareFirst BCBS is proposing an average increase of 52 percent for its plans sold on the exchange. The other two remaining insureres on the Maryland exchange, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan and Evergreen Health, are seeking increases of about 25 percent and 65 percent respectively. The requested rate increases were made at a hearing held by the Maryland Insurance Administration.

These increases are being sought by insurance companies through the State of Maryland for Individual Medical Plans both on and off of the exchange.

Friday, May 5, 2017

Who Gets Hurt and Who Gets Helped if Obamacare is Repealed

The legislation, titled the American Health Care Act, now moves to the Senate, where it will likely change a lot when or if it lands on President Trump's desk. But it's already possible to identify who will get helped and who will get hurt by the bill.

The legislation calls for providing refundable tax credits based on a person's age and income. It allows states to waive some protections for those with pre-existing conditions, while letting insurers charge higher rates to older consumers and levy a 30% surcharge on the premiums of those who let their coverage lapse.

The bill also eliminates the enhanced federal match for Medicaid expansion starting in 2020 and curtails federal support for the entire Medicaid program, which covers about one in five Americans. And it lifts the taxes that Obamacare had imposed on the wealthy, insurers and companies.

Republican lawmakers and supporters say the bill will lower premiums and deductibles and give consumers more control over their health care. But an array of opponents, including many consumer and patient advocacy groups, say this bill could leave millions facing higher health care bills and less coverage.

Here's whom the American Health Care Act would likely help:

Younger Americans could get cheaper plans
Obamacare was designed so that younger policyholders would help subsidize older ones. That would change under the Republican bill because it would allow insurers to charge older folks more.  This means that younger Americans would likely see their annual premiums go down. Enrollees ages 20 to 29 would save about $700 to $4,000 a year, on average, according to a study by the Milliman actuarial firm on behalf of the AARP Public Policy Institute.  Those under age 30 would also get a refundable tax credit of up to $2,000 to offset the cost of their premiums, as long as their income doesn't exceed $215,000 for an individual.

The GOP tax credits would also likely be more generous than Obamacare's subsidies for these folks. For example, a 27-year-old making $40,000 a year would receive $2,000 under the GOP plan, but only gets a $103 subsidy from Obamacare, on average, a Kaiser analysis found.

Also, the bill keeps the Obamacare provision that lets young adults up to age 26 stay on their parents' insurance plan.

The healthy could buy less expensive policies in some states
Obamacare requires insurers to provide an array of health care benefits, including maternity, mental health, prescription drugs and substance abuse. This comprehensive coverage, however, jacks up premiums and provides services that some consumers find unnecessary -- think, a couple in their late 50s who aren't having any more kids likely don't need maternity coverage.
The bill would allow states to waive this federal mandate, which would allow insurers to offer skinnier plans that offer fewer benefits with lower premiums.

Middle class and higher-income Americans could get tax breaks and perks
The Republicans would enable people higher on the income scale to claim the tax credit to help pay their premiums. Under Obamacare, an enrollee who makes more than $47,500 is no longer eligible for a premium subsidy. The GOP plan would let a policyholder making up to $75,000 claim the full tax credit. The benefit would phase out slowly until the enrollee hits $215,000 in income.

The legislation also would eliminate two taxes that Obamacare levied on the wealthy to help pay for the law. Under the Affordable Care Act, single taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000 annually have to pay an additional 0.9% Medicare payroll tax on the amount they earn above these thresholds. These taxpayers may also be hit with a tax surcharge of 3.8% on investment income above those thresholds.

And the bill would allow folks to contribute more to Health Savings Accounts, which are primarily used by better-off Americans who can afford to sock money away for health care expenses.

Here's whom the American Health Care Act would likely hurt:

Lower-income folks could be left uninsured
Obamacare contains many provisions to help poor and lower-income Americans.
Primarily, it expanded Medicaid to cover adults who earn up to $16,400 a year. The American Health Care Act would end the enhanced federal Medicaid funding for new enrollees starting in 2020. And it would curtail federal support for the entire program by sending a fixed amount of money per enrollee or by providing a block grant. States would likely have to either reduce eligibility, curtail benefits or cut provider payments.  All this could hurt not only poor adults, but also low-income children, women, senior citizens and the disabled.  Also, Obamacare provides those with incomes just under $30,000 with generous subsidies to lower their deductibles and out-of-pocket costs in individual market policies. The legislation would eliminate the subsidies.  Finally, the premium tax credits the legislation would provide would not go as far Obamacare's subsidies for lower-income consumers

Folks making $20,000 a year would take the biggest hit at any age under the GOP plan, a Kaiser study found. A 27-year-old earning this amount would only get $2,000, instead of $3,225 under Obamacare, on average. Meanwhile, a 40-year-old would get $3,000 versus nearly $4,150. However, the biggest loser would be a 60-year-old, who would receive only $4,000, instead of nearly $9,900 under Obamacare.

In its review of an early version of the bill, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that 24 million fewer people would have coverage by 2026 as compared to current law. The majority of those would have qualified for Medicaid under Obamacare.
Major health insurance lobbying groups are concerned about the bill's impact on all these folks, many of whom are their customers.

"The American Health Care Act needs important improvements to better protect low- and moderate-income families who rely on Medicaid or buy their own coverage," Marilyn Tavenner, CEO of America's Health Insurance Plans, said after the bill passed the House Thursday.

Older Americans could have to pay more
Enrollees in their 50s and early 60s benefited from Obamacare because insurers could only charge them three times more than younger policyholders. The bill would widen that band to five-to-one. That would mean that adults ages 60 to 64 would see their annual premiums soar 22% to nearly $18,000, according to the Milliman study for the AARP. Those in their 50s would be hit with a 13% increase and pay an annual premium of $12,800.  Also, the GOP bill doesn't provide them with as generous tax credits as Obamacare. A 60-year-old making $40,000 would get only $4,000 from the Republican plan, instead of an average subsidy of $6,750 from the Affordable Care Act, according the Kaiser study.  States could also receive waivers to allow insurers to charge older Americans even more than five times the premiums of the young.

Those with pre-existing conditions could be charged more and get less coverage
States could allow insurers to charge higher premiums to those with pre-existing conditions who let their coverage lapse. These states would have to set up high-risk pools or other programs to help lower the costs of insuring these folks, but many experts say the $138 billion set aside through 2026 for that funding would not be enough.

Consumers with health issues may also find that their policies don't cover all of their needs. That's because states could allow insurers to offer skimpier plans. It's likely many carriers would take them up on that offer since few would want to sell policies that attract the sickest and costliest patients.

CNNMoney (New York)

First published May 4, 2017: 9:10 PM ET

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee in 2017

Information about the Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee in 2017

The Affordable Care Act imposes an annual fee called the Comparative Effectiveness Research Fee (CERF) on insurers and plan sponsors of self-insured coverage to help fund the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. This information includes a brief review of CERF to help answer your questions and prepare you for this year’s payment.

2017 CERF Payment Details
The fee is based on the average covered lives for the applicable 12-month policy or plan year, and is paid using IRS Form 720 by July 31 each year for the plan year that ended in the preceding calendar year. It’s important to remember that employers must use their ERISA plan year if it is different from the renewal date. The fees for 2017 are:

Plan Year Start DateFee Per Average Covered Life
Feb. 1, 2015–Oct. 1, 2015
Nov. 1, 2015–Jan. 1, 2016
$2.17
$2.26

Who Is Responsible for Paying?
  • The Insurance Carrier pays the fee for insured plans (including guaranteed cost, shared returns, and minimum premium plans), and it is built into premiums.
    • Health Reimbursement Accounts (HRAs) and certain Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs) are considered self-funded group health plans. The Insurance Carrier will pay the fee for the underlying medical policy only; clients are responsible for the HRA/FSA related fee.
  • Self-funded plans (including level funding and graded preferred plans) must calculate and pay their own fee.

Monday, March 27, 2017

GOP Fails To Get Enough Support For American Health Care Act

Friday GOP House leaders were unable to get the support needed to move the American Health Care Act forward.  Seeing the "writing on the wall", President Trump withdrew the AHCA and is now focused on Tax Reform.  "Obamacare will remain the law of the land", said Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.  With that said, employers with over 50 employees should continue as usual, complying with the rules, regulations and reporting required under the Affordable Care Act.  Hopefully lawmakers can make changes to the ACA helping business owners by removing fines, penalties and burdensome reporting required each year under the current Health Care Law.

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Legislative Update: ACA Repeal, Replace Advances Through House

Early this morning the House Ways and Means Committee approved the American Health Care Act—to replace tax elements of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)—by a vote of 23-16.
House Republican leadership introduced the legislation March 6. The American Health Care Act was created under the budget reconciliation process and requirements and is limited in its scope to amend only the tax provisions of the ACA. It does not amend the insurance and the underlying coverage requirements of the ACA. Using this process allows supporters of the American Health Care Act to pass changes to the ACA in the Senate with a simple majority of 51 votes instead of the 60 votes needed to override an expected Democratic filibuster. 
In introducing the legislation, House Speaker Paul Ryan outlined three steps Congress and the Trump Administration will now take to replace the ACA:
  1. Pass the American Health Care Act.
  2. Make additional changes to the rules that govern the ACA through the regulatory process.
  3. Work with Democrats to pass legislation to address the insurance elements of the ACA that need reform, which will require support of Senate Democrats in order to avert a filibuster. 
The Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce Committees began work on the bill this week and the legislation will likely change as it works its way through the legislative process.  The House Budget Committee is expected during the week of March 13 to package the Ways and Means language with provisions from the Energy and Commerce Committee, which is yet to vote on the bill. If passed by the Committees, the legislation could be considered by the full House as early as the week of March 20.
Key issues of interest to the HR profession and the workplace: 
  • Reduces employer mandate penalty. Under current law, certain employers are required to provide health insurance or pay a penalty. This bill would reduce the penalty to zero for failure to provide minimum essential coverage. The employer mandate will remain and would have to be repealed through future legislation. The effective date would apply beginning after December 31, 2015, providing retroactive relief to those impacted by the penalty in 2016.
  • Reduces individual mandate penalty. Under current law, most individuals are required to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. This bill would reduce the penalty to zero for failure to maintain minimum essential coverage. The individual mandate will remain and would have to be repealed through future legislation. The effective date would apply beginning after December 31, 2015, providing retroactive relief to those impacted by the penalty in 2016.  
  • Creates a continuous coverage requirement surcharge. This bill creates a new continuous coverage requirement surcharge. To avoid a 30 percent premium surcharge, individuals must prove that they did not have a gap in creditable coverage beyond 63 continuous days during the 12 months preceding coverage. Individuals aging out of dependent coverage must prove that they enrolled during the first open enrollment period after which dependent coverage ceased. The penalty does not vary by health status but would be greater for older individuals since premiums may vary with age. The penalty lasts for the remainder of the plan year for special enrollments during 2018, and for the 12-month period beginning with the first day of the plan year for 2019 and succeeding years.
  • Delays excise tax on high-value health care plans. The ACA imposed a 40 percent excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage to benefits exceeding certain thresholds ($10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for family coverage). Under current law, the tax is scheduled to go into effect in 2020. This bill changes the effective date of the tax for taxable periods beginning after Dec. 31, 2024.
  • Repeals the health insurance tax. The ACA imposed an annual fee on certain health insurers. The proposal repeals this health insurance tax beginning after Dec. 31, 2017.
  • Repeals increase of tax on HSAs. The ACA increased the percentage of the tax on distributions that are not used for qualified medical expenses to 20 percent. This bill lowers the rate to pre-ACA percentages. This change is effective for distributions after Dec. 31, 2017.
  • Repeals the limit on contributions to FSAs. The ACA limits the amount an employer or individual may contribute to a health Flexible Spending Account (FSA) to $2,500, indexed for cost-of-living adjustments. This bill repeals the limitation on health FSA contributions for taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 2017.
As noted above, the bill does not repeal the ACA insurance reforms, including the following health plan requirements:
    • Coverage of pre-existing conditions;
    • Guarantee availability and renewability of coverage;
    • Coverage of adult children up to age 26;
    • Cap out-of-pocket expenditures;
    • Prohibitions against health status underwriting, lifetime and annual limits, and discrimination on the basis of race, nationality, disability, age, or sex.
Since the legislation does not eliminate the employer mandate, employer reporting requirements under the ACA would not change.
-SHRM-By Chatrane Birbal, March 9, 2017

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

IRS will continue to accept 'silent' individual tax returns

FEB 17, 2017 | BY JESSICA LEDONNE

Becoming the first agency to take action in response to President Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies “minimize...the economic and regulatory burdens of the Act”, the IRS has told tax preparers that it will not automatically reject individual returns that do not state whether or not the filer had health coverage.

Although at first blush, accepting such “silent” returns would appear to be a loosening of the enforcement of the ACA’s individual mandate, this is not actually a change in policy, as the agency accepted and processed over 4 million silent returns last year.

The information, coming in an email correspondence rather than a formal rule or release, stated that the IRS would “continue to allow electronic and paper returns to be accepted for processing in instances where a taxpayer doesn’t indicate their coverage status.” The email went on to confirm that this did not impact taxpayers’ responsibility to obtain health insurance or to pay a penalty, even reiterating that the ACA is “still in force” and that “taxpayers remain required to follow the law and pay what they may owe‎.” Therefore, although these silent returns won’t be automatically rejected, they may eventually lead to questions, audits, or eventual penalties.

Ultimately, experts seem to agree that the decision to continue to accept returns with no health coverage information will not have much of an impact on the ACA’s individual mandate requirements, but rather, is the IRS confirming that they will continue to do what they’ve previously done.

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

21st Century Cures Act Allows Small Employers To Use HRA's To Fund Individual Medical Plans

The 21st Century Cures Act, in part, has removed barriers for qualified small employers (under 50 employees) wishing to allow employees to purchase Individual health plans and help pay the premiums on a pre-tax basis.  Previously, this practice was dis-allowed with stiff penalties for those that did.  

In an excerpt from a SHRM post dated December 13, 2016 by Stephen Miller:

President Barack Obama on Dec. 13 signed into law the 21st Century Cures Act, which will let small businesses use health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) to fund employees who purchase individual health plans on the open market.
The bipartisan bill, which Congress passed Dec. 7, focuses primarily on speeding up drug approvals and making innovative treatments more accessible. But it also includes provisions that affect employer-provided health benefits, specifically using HRAs to pay for nongroup plan premiums and ensuring that a health plan's mental health care benefits are equivalent to its physical health care benefits.
HRA Roadblock Removed
The legislation allows small employers with fewer than 50 full-time employees or equivalents that don't sponsor a group health plan to fund employee HRAs to pay for qualified out-of-pocket medical expenses and for nongroup plan health insurance premiums, including for plans purchased on public health care exchanges under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Federal agencies' rules, in particular IRS Notice 2013-54 and DOL Technical Release 2013-03, have frustrated many small employers by preventing them from using so-called "stand-alone HRAs" to reimburse employees who buy nongroup health insurance coverage.
"Many employers were upset when the Obama administration shut down the ability for employers to just provide money on a pretax basis for employees to purchase their own health insurance on the open market—a trend that many saw as the wave of the future," said Brian Pinheiro, chair of the employee benefits group at law firm Ballard Spahr in Philadelphia.
The 21st Century Cures Act, which incorporates key elements of the proposed Small Business Healthcare Relief Act, creates a new type of HRA—the qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement (QSEHRA). The legislation specifies that:
  • The maximum reimbursement for health expenses that small employers can provide through employee QSEHRAs is $4,950 for single coverage and $10,000 for family coverage, to be adjusted annually for inflation.
  • Small employers that choose to provide QSEHRAs must offer them to all full-time employees except those who have not yet completed 90 days of service, are under 25 years of age, or who are covered by a collective bargaining agreement for accident and health benefits. Part-time and seasonal workers may also be excluded.
  • Generally, an employer must make the same QSEHRA contributions for all eligible employees. However, amounts may vary based on the price of an insurance policy in the relevant individual health insurance market, which in turn can be based on the age of the employee and eligible family members, or the number of family members covered.

Monday, November 21, 2016

IRS Delays Employers’ Deadline to Distribute ACA Reporting Form 1095 to Employees

In a move that caught many in the benefits community by surprise, the IRS issued Notice 2016-70 on Nov. 18, giving employers subject to the Affordable Care Act's (ACA's) 2016 information-reporting requirements up to an additional 30 days to deliver these forms to employees.
The notice affects upcoming deadlines for ACA information reporting as follows:
  • The IRS extended the deadline to deliver ACA reporting forms to employees from Jan. 31, 2017 to March 2. The extended deadline applies to furnishing to individuals the 2016Form 1095-C (Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage) and Form 1095-B(Health Coverage). 

    The Treasury Department and the IRS determined that a substantial number of employers and other insurance providers needed additional time "to gather and analyze the information [necessary to] prepare the 2016 Forms 1095-C and 1095-B to be furnished to individuals," Notice 2016-70 states.
  • This extension applies for tax year 2016 only, and does not require the submission of any request or other documentation to the IRS.
  • The IRS did not change the deadline for filing Forms 1094 and 1095 with the agency.This means there will be no extension to file the 2016 Form 1094-B (Transmittal of Health Coverage Information Returns) along with copies of Form 1095-B, and Form 1094-C(Transmittal of Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage Information Returns) along with copies of Form 1095-C.

    Employers filing these forms by mail will still need to do so by Feb. 28, 2017. Employers filing electronically (as those submitting 250 or more forms are required to do) must do so by March 31.
 Previous IRS Due DateNew IRS Due Date
Deadline to distribute ACA reporting forms to employees and covered individualsJan. 31, 2017March 2, 2017
Deadline to file ACA reporting forms with the IRS
Feb. 28, 2017 (paper)
March 31, 2017 (electronic)
No change
  • The IRS extended "good faith transition relief" for another year. In 2015, the IRS announced it would not penalize employers for incorrect or incomplete forms if they could show they made good-faith efforts to comply with the reporting requirements. No relief was available to employers who did not timely file the forms at all. Notice 2016-70 extends that good-faith relief to the 2016 reporting year. 

    The notice also clarified that the relief applies to "missing and inaccurate taxpayer identification numbers and dates of birth."
"The IRS announcement is welcome news to many employers still struggling to interpret and apply the IRS instructions to their reporting obligation," said Marcus Wilbers, a compliance attorney at benefits brokerage J.W. Terrill in St. Louis.
"This deadline was especially challenging because it coincided with Form 1099 and W2 processing schedules," said Mike Downey, executive vice president of BenefitScape, a Boston-based benefits services firm. "A 30-day extension, while short, moves the printing and distribution to a more opportune time."

A Second Year of Relief
Last December, the IRS gave employers subject to the ACA's 2015 information reporting requirements extra time to give these forms to employees and file them with the government. At that time, the IRS indicated it did not anticipate any additional extensions regarding ACA information reporting for future years.
Most employers and practitioners will now take advantage of the extended relief for distributing reporting forms to employees, Downey predicted.
Like last year, the guidance provides that employees can file their personal income taxes without having to attach the relevant Form 1095 to their tax returns. Taxpayers, however, should keep these forms with their other tax-year documents, as the IRS will request to view them if the taxpayer is audited.
ACA Reporting Is Still Required
Applicable large employers—those with 50 or more full-time or equivalent employees—are subject to the ACA's employer mandate and its related tracking and reporting requirements.
President-elect Donald Trump has made repealing and replacing the ACA a top priority, although the extent to which his administration and the GOP Congress can accomplish that goal is subject to debate. And while even short of full repeal the employer mandate is seen as a likely, early, target, "the ACA is still the law of the land," said Scott Behrens, an ERISA compliance attorney at Lockton Companies, a benefits brokerage based in Kansas City, Mo. "Prudent employers will want to continue to comply with the ACA, including the play-or-pay mandate and reporting requirements until formal guidance relieves them of those compliance obligations."
Small employers with fewer than 50 full-time employees are exempt from some, but not all, of the ACA's reporting requirements. For example, those with a self-insured health plan must complete and file Forms 1095-B and 1094-B with the IRS, as well as provide employees with a copy of Form 1095-B. Small employers also are required to file Forms 1095-C and 1094-C if they are members of a controlled or affiliated service group that collectively has at least 50 full-time employees.

Penalties Left Intact
Notwithstanding the extension, the IRS encouraged employers to furnish the 2016 statements as soon as they are able. Employers that do not meet the extended deadlines will remain subject to penalties.
"The IRS stated in Notice 2016-70 that it would apply a reasonable cause analysis when determining the penalty amount for a late filer," said Damian Myers, a benefits attorney with Proskauer in Washington, D.C.
"According to the IRS, this analysis will take into account such things as whether reasonable efforts were made to prepare for filing"—such as an employer's gathering and transmitting data to an agent or testing its own ability to transmit information to the IRS—"and the extent to which the filer is taking steps to ensure that it can comply with the reporting requirements for 2017," Myers noted
By Stephen Miller, CEBS
Nov 21, 2016



Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Repeal of the "Cadillac Tax" under ACA

The Cadillac tax is slated to take effect in 2018 for individuals with health insurance plans worth more than $10,200 a year or families with plans worth more than $27,500. That's $850 for an individual plan and includes other things like Employer HSA contributions, Employer HRA Contributions, Wellness plans, pre-tax policies for specific disease or illness plans (Cancer Policy). The tax itself is a 40% non-deductible excise tax on any amount above these thresholds.  Under the tax, those plans that are fully insured, employers calculate and insurers pay the tax, for Self-funded plans, the employers calculate and "the person who administers the plan benefits" pays and under HSA's and HRA's Employers calculate and employers pay.

The tax was included in the law to curb the highly comprehensive, highly expensive health plans as well as help raise funding for the ACA, an estimate 87 Billion over the next ten years.

Now that we are getting closer to point of impact, even democrats are no longer supporting the tax because it's not really a tax on "Cadillac Plans" but many mid-level plans simply because of the rising cost of health care.

"The 'Cadillac Tax' will raise barriers that would deprive patients of needed cancer screenings, diagnostic tests and lifesaving treatment," said Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., who is the sponsor of a House bill to repeal the tax.  "We must repeal this onerous tax before it diminishes the progress we have made since enactment of the ACA."   




Wednesday, October 14, 2015

Repeal of Definition of Small Employer Group back to 1-50 Employees under ACA

On October 8, 2015, the federal government repealed the legislation that had redefined employer groups with 51 to 100 full-time-equivalent employees as small groups for 2016 health insurance coverage.

However, the federal legislation still allows individual states the option to expand the definition of small group from 1 to 100 employees in 2016, which is the definition currently set by the Virginia and District of Columbia legislatures.

Following the federal announcement to repeal the decision to redefine employers with 51-100 employees as small groups, Maryland issued bulletin (15-27) stating that Maryland's definition of small group will align with the federal changes and remain at the 1-50 employee level.


Bulletin 15-27 states, "Since Maryland law has been drafted to follow the federal law, for plan years that begin on or after January 1, 2016, small employers will be those that during the preceding calendar year employed an average of not more than 50 employees.”

Excerpt from Kaiser Foundation Health plan

This is good news as groups over 50 Full-Time and Full Time Equivalents were being pushed down to small group which historically has had higher rates and more ACA mandates.

Friday, July 24, 2015

Insurer Mega Mergers: What It May Mean To You

Not too long ago Coventry was gobbled up by Aetna, then Aetna grabbed Humana and now Anthem making a deal to purchase Cigna.  With these mega-mergers what should we expect?  Will rates rise because we have less competition?  Will, the now, larger insurers decide to merge and move us even closer to a socialist single-payer system?  


Excerpt by Chad Bray, NewYorkTimes 7-24-15....

The health insurer Anthem said on Friday that it had agreed to acquire its rival Cigna for $48.3 billion in a deal that would further concentrate the United States market to just a few major players.The combined company would have estimated revenue of about $115 billion and serve more than 53 million people with medical coverage.A flurry of deals are reshaping the industry. Earlier this month Aetna agreed to acquire Humana, the smallest of the big five insurers, for $37 billion in cash and stock. If both transactions are completed, the number of major health insurers in the United States will shrink to three.Health insurers are seeking to consolidate to gain greater scale to reduce costs and capitalize on growing opportunities in the government and individual markets. A major force has been the Obama administration’shealth care overhaul, which has bolstered revenues. But greater transparency in pricing and less generous funding of government plans have also put profit margins under pressure.
It is possible that regulators in the United States could block some mergers: Antitrust officials at the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission have shown an increasing willingness to do so if they believe the alliances could hurt consumers.
Analysts have said that antitrust regulators would probably allow only some deals to go forward, and that they could stop others if they decided that too much power was being concentrated in too few hands.

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Who Reports What to the IRS and Employees under Section 6055 of the ACA?

Beginning this year and filing in 2016, employers, insurers and the insurance marketplace will be required to file forms to employees and/or the IRS indicating who had health insurance coverage and when during 2015.  The filing deadline for employers is January 31st, 2016 for statements given to employees/individuals and February 29th for transmittal's filed to the IRS (March 30th if you are filing over 250 employee statements to employees).  This is the information that the IRS will use to penalize the individual or the employer if they are not offering appropriate and affordable coverage and is used by the individual when preparing their personal tax returns.  

The big question is:  Are you as an employer responsible for filing these forms?

From irs.gov.........The Affordable Care Act added section 6055 to the Internal Revenue Code, which provides that every provider of minimum essential coverage will report coverage information by filing an information return with the IRS and furnishing a statement to individuals.


The answer is: yes and no  

If you have less that 50 full time equivalent employees and fully-insured then the health insurance carrier is responsible for the transmittal that is sent to the IRS (Form 1094B) and the Statement that is sent to the individual employee for their taxes (1094C).

If you have less than 50 full time equivelant employees and are self-insured, the employer is responsible for filing the Transmittal to the IRS (Form 1095B) and the  Statement to the employee (1095C)

If you are fully-insured or self-insured with over 50 full time equivalent employees then the employer is responsible for filing the Transmittal to the IRS (Form 1095B) and the Statement to the employee (1095C).

As a side-note, people with individual coverage directly with an insurance carrier or through the exchanges will receive a statement on form 1095A from either the Insurance Marketplace (Exchange) or from the Carriers.



Thursday, November 6, 2014

Group Health Plans That Fail to Cover In-Patient Hospitalization Services

Health plans that are trying to offer a stripped down Minimal Value plan to save costs and avoid penalties need to be careful.  The Fed is cracking down on these types of plans by requiring in-patient hospitalization services as part of the coverage.  Please see below release via IRS Guidewire. 

Group Health Plans That Fail to Cover In-Patient Hospitalization Services

VIA IRS GUIDEWIRE:  
Notice 2014-69 advises employers and other taxpayers that employer-sponsored health plans that fail to provide substantial coverage for in-patient hospitalization services or for physician services do not provide minimum value within the meaning of § 36B and that the IRS, the Treasury Department, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) expect shortly to propose regulations to this effect.  The notice also advises that IRS, Treasury, and HHS are considering whether the continuance tables underlying the Minimum Value Calculator produce valid actuarial results for plans with these designs. Employers offering plans that fail to cover in-patient hospitalization or physician services should exercise caution in relying on the Minimum Value Calculator to demonstrate that these plans provide minimum value for any portion of a taxable year after publication of final regulations.

Notice 2014-69 will appear in IRB 2014-48 dated Nov. 24, 2014.




Monday, October 6, 2014

Parental Leave Law Now In Effect October 1, 2014-FMLA Light

Beginning October 1, 2014, all Maryland businesses with 15-49 employees will be required to provide up to six weeks of unpaid parental leave to an employee upon the birth of their child or the placement of an adopted or foster care child. The Parental Leave Law requires the employer to hold the employee’s job for up to six weeks or return the employee to an “equivalent position” when the employee returns within the six week leave period.  In order to qualify under this law, the employee must have worked for the employer 12 months and a minimum of 1250 hours in the previous 12 months. 
For employers with more than fifty employees, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) already requires those employers grant 12 weeks of unpaid leave for various qualifying family and medical events, the new Maryland law is geared to providing employees who work for smaller employers with a lighter version of FMLA.  One major difference is that the new Maryland law does not cover medical leave (as it is limited to parental leave) and it only provides for six weeks of leave.  As is under FMLA, employee benefits must be maintained by the employer while on leave.  Premiums may be recovered by the employer if the employee fails to return to work after the leave ends
Employers should update employee handbooks and draft Parental Leave Policy that adheres to the new law.


Tuesday, July 22, 2014

COURT BARS PPACA AID FOR FEDERAL EXCHANGE SHOPPERS

By Andrew Zajac
July 22 (Bloomberg)

President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul suffered a potentially crippling blow as a U.S. appeals court ruled the government can’t give financial assistance to anyone buying
coverage on the insurance marketplace run by federal authorities.  

The decision, if it withstands appeals, may deprive more than half the people who signed up for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act the tax credits they need to buy a health plan.

The way PPACA is written makes clear that the subsidy is available only to people who
bought plans on state-run exchanges, a three-judge panel in Washington ruled today.

Only 14 states have opted to set up their own marketplaces, making delivery of tax credits via
the federal exchange crucial to meeting Obamacare’s goal of broadening health-care coverage
in the U.S.

“A very large share of people need the subsidies,” said Robert Blendon, a professor of health
policy at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston.

If the ruling isn’t overturned, “it basically would significantly cripple the law,” Blendon said in an
interview before the ruling.