oriecat

A cafeteria plan itself is not a group health plan. It is a method to choose and pay for benefits. It is not the benefits themselves. If the component benefits are group health plans then COBRA is required. I would assume that most cafeplan docs include COBRA info since the component benefits would qualify. Kinda double cover, I guess? But for example, if your cafeteria plan only offered Dependent Care, then it would not be needed, as DCAP is not subject to COBRA.

Movable Type can be complicated to set up. You have to have your own webspace and domain name, plus do all of the adminstration, customizing etc yourself. Also, I don't think it's free anymore, or only in a limited edition?

There is also Word Press, which I use for all of my own blogs and sites. But again, like MT, you have to have the space to host it and while the learning curve isn't steep, you do have to know some stuff.

I think you can easily create a free blog using http://www.blogger.com They have templates so you wouldn't really need to know anything.

PS html means hyper text mark-up language

I say tomorrow. This is like the Price is Right and it's better to be under, than over, right?

Don't you think it would be hard to get new hires with a one year waiting period for insurance?

Are there schedules associated with a Medical FSA plan that would need to be filed, or just the basic 5500? If the FSA was included as part of the 501, would anything additional be needed?

I don't understand why an employer would want to pass the fee along to the employees. Seems a bit petty to me. The FICA savings we get from the pre-tax contributions easily covers the administration fee we pay.

I don't think those notices are an equivalent situation. That had to do with employees donating the dollar value of leave time to charitable contributions that the employer would then make on their behalf. For example, if I said take 8 hours of my PTO and give it to the United Way. It wasn't a leave sharing program for employees. The quote that I posted from Pub 15A is still valid and was contained in Revenue Ruling 90-29. But you could always get a private letter ruling from the IRS with the details of your plan and see what they say.

I think he is talking about FSA plans. (At least that was my assumption based on the post being in the Cafeplan section of the board....)

Did the child come to live with the employee? Couldn't it be seen as an event that caused a change in the number of dependents?

The reg is 29CFR2510.3-1(b). But it specifically says "Payment of an employee's normal compensation" in the section on sick/disability pay (2510.3-1(b)(2)), so I am wondering if since they are only paying a partial amount to make up with the state amount, then maybe it wouldn't qualify under the reg?

Well I didn't read it closely enough, sorry about that!

I would agree with you. We all have to become psychics so we can take advantage of this. I guess it would be easy if you knew you would be scheduled for a surgery or something, but otherwise I don't see how people would know to switch it.

An employee who changed from pre-tax to after-tax might still be partially taxed on the benefits, due to the 3 years of premium rule.

I'm in OR & WA, but read up quite a bit on CA issues, since it's right next door and you never know when the boss will decide to move south. (Oh how I hope he never does...)

Thank you Blinky! I thought it through and pretty much came to the same conclusion, but wanted to verify.

On our 2002-3 5500, we (well the tpa) marked that it is the final report, as for the next year, we are changing the plan sponsor, plan name and plan #, so it seems like it will be a different plan, so this would be the last year of this plan. But the EBSA wrote back saying it was inconsistent, since there were participants at the end of the year, and maybe we didn't mean to mark it as final report? So should it not be marked as final due to the changes for next year?

Thanks

According to IRS Pub 15-A:

If you establish a leave sharing plan for your employees that allows them to transfer leave to other employees for medical emergencies, the amounts paid to the recipients of the leave are considered wages. These amounts are includible in the gross income of the recipients and are subject to social security, Medicare, and FUTA taxes, and income tax withholding. Do not include these amounts in the income of the transferors. These rules apply only to leave sharing plans that permit employees to transfer leave to other employees for medical emergencies.

Seems to me that if you carefully qualified what is eligible then you won't even need to do the 'haircut'.

Can't shed light on trends, but if it helps... We started offering voluntary disability in Dec 02, and the plan included a one year pre-x.

Does the plan doc address the discount anywhere, or is it unwritten? What about the COBRA notices, do they mention it and what does it say?

Our plan allows changes at any time.

If they grossed-up the check, then they paid the taxes for you. You're getting the same amount back, it shouldn't make much difference.

I have seen arguments for and against COBRA premiums to employees being taxable. I am not sure at this point. The IRS clarified in Pub 15-A that COBRA premiums for ex-employees are excludable, but it does not address current employees. Sounds like the employer is playing it safe.

Gburns, the original does not say that the premiums were paid pre-tax. The funding of the reimbursement account is pre-tax.

I see no reason the employee couldn't have dual coverage, if he/she qualifies under both plans. Benefits would need to coordinate between the plans.

Our plans go through end of month, but I've heard it done both ways.

I think you should just verify the marriage before digging into any claims. Just send a letter stating that the plan is auditing dependent eligibility and ask for proof. Then if there is any issue you can get into dealing with claims, but if it turns out they are married, then you won't have wasted the time dealing with the privacy issues.

If you want to be nice and allow him to enroll her, and if your insurance carrier agrees to it, then I don't see any reason that you can't allow it. To my knowledge, the regs allow 60 days for election, but I don't think they say you can't allow longer. Again, only if the carrier agrees of course. But due to her age, she will probably be a high claims risk, so the carrier might not want to allow it, and you should also consider that in your decision. Also if you allow it for her, will you need to allow others more time also?