leevena

Good idea, but check with carriers first. My hunch is that the state requires submittal/approval of forms they use.

Then maybe I am confused. The employer is not changing the premium rate, it is changing the employer contribution. For example, single rate is $400/cobra is $408 and the employer contributers $300 towards the cost of the plan. The cobra enrollee is not receiving the ER contribution of $300. So if the ER makes a different level of contribution available, it does not affect the cobra person. What am I missing?

The employer can develop a COBRA rate of no more than the full rate+admin charge. But the employer could also charge less, if they so desire. My guess is that they would need to review company policy and maybe change plan documents, if applicable. But since the COBRA people are ex employees, it would seem to be a waste of time/money to do this.

I don't see how you could do this with the medical carrier...not being argumentative. So, when you find out from the carrier, please post the answer.

Sorry to say, but yes. There is no legal requirement anywhere, yet, that requires a health plan be offered to employees. There are rules that prohibit discrimination in a group, for example, if you offer coverage to salaried employees, you cannot exclude someone in that "salaried group" of employees. Are you eligible for an extension under cobra?

Leo is correct. I am somewhat concerned that the HSA model may not survive, but since the last election, it might stay. Just waiting for final.

To make things easy for you, submit the application to your health carrier and let them tell the employee no.

Hope I understand the question correctly. But the additional monies that the employee elects to be deposited is taken from their pay and deposited into the HSA account, without a taxable event. Is that what you are asking?

A little confused by some of what you said, i.e., when was OE, when was deadline, what does it mean your in healthcare, etc. But, lets assume that all this occured within the last few weeks (which I am assuming), and that mistakes were made by both sides (which it appears), and the students were on the plan in the past, just keep them on. It's only vision and dental.

Try a general agent, there is one in this area Rogers Benefit Group. By the way, I am not an employee of that company. Good luck.

No, the fsa cannot be used for employee contributions towards premium. The pre-taxing of those contributions is done outside the fsa.

I agree with the QDROphile. Also, the first thing I would do is check the health plan documents for eligibility. If the plan is fully insured by a carrier, I doubt very much if these employees would even be eligible for coverage. If the group is self-funded, check the plan docs.

Little confused by your post/question, sorry. The requirement of "to age 27" for dependents is for all plans, whether grandfathered or not. Does this answer your question?

You should inquire at your mom's company. Some companies are keeping students on because they do not want to go to through the hassle of dis-enrolling a student only to re-enroll them shortly thereafter.

Yes, I saw the same Hewitt survey. My comment about very few should have been clarified. What I meant was that after you take into account the larger, self-funded groups that can avoid HCR, of the small (under 500 or so) very few of them will be in a grandfather status within the next few years. Hope this clarification helps.

That depends on what they employer wants to do. If an employer views their employee benefits (health plan in particular) as an important part of company, then they probably do not want to be required to operate under the new health care reform environment. This leaves them two options; the first being to become self-insured (which HC reform affects very little), or the second being to keep the grandfather status. By the way, read the grandfathering rules, because very few, if any groups will be grandfathered. So in the end, it's either submit to health care reform, or self-fund. Hope this helps, or answers your question.

I have seen this scenario before, in So. Cal. The TPA contracted with the trustees of an association that qualified for Davis Bacon work. The employer did not contract with the tpa, rather, it was at the association level. I am sorry, I do not remember the exact reason behind it, but I do remember it was a good one. I was with a carrier that provided medical coverage to the association.

For what it's worth. I ran into a similar situation about 12 years ago in upstate NY. A group of govt agencies came together under a single self-funded medical plan. State of NY then changed the regs so that the plan had to have reserves on hand, and effectively, act like an insured product. Long and short of it, they ended up leaving that environment and going with a Minimum Premium plan.

It depends on your situation. Hate to add to my response, but you might be interested in the first scenario, or some version of it. Let's assume you do not need the money from your HSA to pay your medical bills. You can fund your HSA, to the maximum, yearly and take the tax deduction along with the tax favored treatment of gains within the account. As your HSA fund grows, it will allow you to purchase larger deductible plans, which in turn have a smaller premium. Additionally, you can use this fund at age 65+ as another source of retirement income. I realize this is an unrealistic scenario for many people, but it might fit your situation. On the other hand, let's assume you do need the money from your HSA to pay your bills. Let's assuming; 1) you have family coverage, 2) you have deposited $3,000 out of a maximum of $6,150, and 3) your expected total claim cost for 2010 is $4,000. At the very least, you should fund the expected claim cost ($4,000) so that you can get the tax advantage. You can take it out of your HSA account or from another source, it's up to you. Hope this helps.

Could be both, depending on your state and type of coverage, insured vs. self-funded. Easiest thing to do is ask your broker/consultant.

COBRA requires that the employee not be charged more for COBRA coverage than the premium equivalent plus 2% admin fee. Unless the family and 2-person costs are the same, the employer cannot do this. The 2-person category would be paying more.

Enrollment in a HSA makes this person ineligible for the FSA, unless the FSA is a "limited purpose" or "post-deductible" type plan.

Your comment about "career enhancer" is probably right on target. Rarely does a plan allow board members to be eligible. When you look at the make-up of a board you usually have two groups; 1) employees of the company, and 2) outsiders. The first group (employees) are presumable covered/eligible already, so it is the "outsiders" that you are focused on for this project. You are self-funded, which gives you more flexibility when it comes to eligibility, so making coverage to the "outsiders" available is not too difficult. First check your plan documents and see if they are eligible as of now. If they are, no big deal and your career is enhanced! Assuming that they are not, you will need to change the eligibility language and have your employer adopt this new policy. If I were you, I would also have some estimates of expected claim cost that these new participants might have on your plan experience. It may or may not be a big issue. Then I would kick this up the ladder to a senior exec/president to make the decision. This gives you some cover. Hope this answers your question. Good luck.

Check your plan contract and you may see a 30-day grace period. This is not unusual. And as for the IRS, there is no requirement for this.

I'am sure that someone once told me, but I can't remember. My best guess is that it dilutes the "better" risk within the group. It's been over 25 years since I started, so I apologize for not remembering the exact reason.