ACA

DOL Issues Final Regulations Regarding Association Health Plans

On June 19, 2018, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published Frequently Asked Questions About Association Health Plans (AHPs) and issued a final rule that broadens the definition of "employer" and the provisions under which an employer group or association may be treated as an "employer" sponsor of a single multiple-employer employee welfare benefit plan and group health plan under Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

The final rule is intended to facilitate adoption and administration of AHPs and expand health coverage access to employees of small employers and certain self-employed individuals. Generally, it does this in four main ways:

  • It relaxes the requirement that group or association members share a common interest, as long as they operate in a common geographic area.

  • It confirms that groups or associations whose members operate in the same trade, industry, line of business, or profession can sponsor AHPs, regardless of geographic distribution.

  • It clarifies the existing requirement that groups or associations sponsoring AHPs must have at least one substantial business purpose unrelated to providing health coverage or other employee benefits.

  • It permits AHPs that meet the final rule's new requirements to enroll working owners who do not have employees.

The final rule was effective on August 20, 2018.

The final rule applied to fully-insured AHPs on September 1, 2018, to existing self-insured AHPs on January 1, 2019, and to new self-insured AHPs formed under this final rule on April 1, 2019.

The DOL used a staggered approach to implement this final rule so states and state insurance regulators would have time to tailor their regulations to the final rule and address a range of oversight and compliance assistance issues, especially concerns about self-insured AHPs' vulnerability to financial mismanagement and abuse.

On March 28, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Court) found that the DOL's final rule exceeded the statutory authority delegated by Congress under ERISA and that the final rule unlawfully expands ERISA's scope. In particular, the Court found the final rule's provisions – defining "employer" to include associations of disparate employers and expanding membership in these associations to include working owners without employees – are unlawful and must be set aside.

The Court's order vacates the specific provisions of the DOL's final rule regarding "bona fide group or association of employers," "commonality of interest," and "dual treatment of working owners as employers and employees." The Court order sends the final rule back to the DOL to consider how the final rule's severability provision affects the final rule's remaining portions.

The Court's order does not affect employers who formed AHPs under the DOL's previous guidance regarding the definition of "employer." Both existing and new employer groups or associations that meet the DOL's pre-rule guidance can continue to sponsor an AHP.

This order stops employers from sponsoring new self-insured AHPs under the final rule beginning on April 1, 2019.

For an employer that relies on the final rule's expanded definition of "employer" to currently sponsor a fully-insured AHP or existing self-insured AHP, the employer should consult with its attorney as soon as possible. If the employer can meet the DOL's pre-rule guidance, then it can continue to sponsor an AHP.

However, if the employer cannot meet the DOL's pre-rule guidance, then the employer should consult with its attorney to determine whether it can amend its structure and plan document to meet the DOL's pre-rule guidance. If it cannot meet the DOL's pre-rule guidance through plan amendment, then the employer should consult with its attorny on how to proceed because the AHP will no longer qualify as an ERISA plan and may be subject to the ACA's individual market and small group market rule as well as state regulation.

Although the DOL issued Questions and Answers after the Court's decision, the DOL has not indicated how it will proceed. The DOL could revise its final rule or could appeal the decision and request that the Court stay its decision pending the appeal. Employers in AHPs should keep apprised of future developments in this case.

Read the full Advisor

 

Credits:
United Benefit Advisors

PCORI Fee Increase for Health Plans | California Benefits Consultants

On November 5, 2018, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released Notice 2018-85 to announce that the health plan Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) fee for plan years ending between October 1, 2018 and September 30, 2019 will be $2.45 per plan participant. This is an increase from the prior year’s fee of $2.39 due to an inflation adjustment.

Background

The Affordable Care Act created the PCORI to study clinical effectiveness and health outcomes. To finance the nonprofit institute’s work, a small annual fee — commonly called the PCORI fee — is charged on group health plans.

The fee is an annual amount multiplied by the number of plan participants. The dollar amount of the fee is based on the ending date of the plan year. For instance:

  • For plan year ending between October 1, 2017 and September 30, 2018: $2.39.

  • For plan year ending between October 1, 2018 and September 30, 2019: $2.45.

Insurers are responsible for calculating and paying the fee for insured plans. For self-funded health plans, however, the employer sponsor is responsible for calculating and paying the fee. Payment is due by filing Form 720 by July 31 following the end of the calendar year in which the health plan year ends. For example, if the group health plan year ends December 31, 2018, Form 720 must be filed along with payment no later than July 31, 2019.

Certain types of health plans are exempt from the fee, such as:

  • Stand-alone dental and/or vision plans;

  • Employee assistance, disease management, and wellness programs that do not provide significant medical care benefits;

  • Stop-loss insurance policies; and

  • Health savings accounts (HSAs).

HRAs and QSEHRAs

A traditional health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) is exempt from the PCORI fee, provided that it is integrated with another self-funded health plan sponsored by the same employer. In that case, the employer pays the PCORI fee with respect to its self-funded plan, but does not pay again just for the HRA component. If, however, the HRA is integrated with a group insurance health plan, the insurer will pay the PCORI fee with respect to the insured coverage and the employer pays the fee for the HRA component.

A qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement (QSEHRA) works a little differently. A QSEHRA is a special type of tax-preferred arrangement that can only be offered by small employers (generally those with fewer than 50 employees) that do not offer any other health plan to their workers. Since the QSEHRA is not integrated with another plan, the PCORI fee applies to the QSEHRA. Small employers that sponsor a QSEHRA are responsible for reporting and paying the PCORI fee.

PCORI Nears its End

The PCORI program will sunset in 2019. The last payment will apply to plan years that end by September 30, 2019 and that payment will be due in July 2020. There will not be any PCORI fee for plan years that end on October 1, 2019 or later.

Resources

The IRS provides the following guidance to help plan sponsors calculate, report, and pay the PCORI fee:

Originally posted on thinkhr.com

Affordable Care Act Update | California Benefit Partners

Health Insurance key words wheel.jpg

Recently, the President signed a bill repealing the Affordable Care Act’s Individual Mandate (the tax penalty imposed on individuals who are not enrolled in health insurance). While some are praising this action, there are others who are concerned with its aftermath. So how does this affect you and why should you pay attention to this change?

First, as an individual, if you do not carry health insurance, you are currently paying a penalty of $695/adult not covered and $347.50/uninsured child with penalties going even as high as $2085/household. These penalties have been the deciding factor for most uninsured Americans—go broke buying insurance but they have insurance, or go broke paying a fine and still be uninsured. With the repeal signed in December 2017, these penalties are zeroed out starting January 1, 2019.  While it seems that the repeal of the tax penalty should be good news all around, it does have some ramifications. Without reform in the healthcare arena for balanced pricing, when individuals make a mass exodus in 2019, we can expect higher premiums to account for the loss of insured customers.

As a business, you are still under the Employer Mandate of the ACA. There have been no changes to the coverage guidelines and reporting requirements of this Act. However, with healthy people opt-ing out of health insurance coverage, the employer premiums can expect to be raised to cover the increased expenses of the sick. Some do predict the possibility of the repeal of some parts of the Employer Mandate —specifically PCORI fees and employment reporting. The Individual and Employer Mandates were created to compliment each other and so changes to one tend to mean changes to the other. 

So, why should you pay attention to this change? Because the balance the ACA Individual Mandate was designed to help make in the health insurance marketplace is now unbalanced. Taking one item from the scale results in instability. Both employers and employees will be affected by this tax repeal in one way or another.