Search the Community

Wondering if others have dealt with this idea or can anticipate any hurdles -- Say a company had a standard dependent care FSA program, no pre-tax employer contributions to the employee accounts. Company now wants to establish a fund for employer contributions but subject to taxes, for participating DC FSA employees but not directly to their DC FSA accounts (so to avoid any pre-tax issues plus to avoid being considered towards the employees' $5k/$2.5k contributions limit). Fund would be fixed per year at $xx total (decided at the beginning of the year or end of prior year), and then allocated between participants based on the # of participants in the prior plan year (as if it's a pool to be divvied up based on prior year participation). Eligible participants include anyone who participated in the prior plan year and is still employed at the beginning of the applicable year. Anyone seen this before, or something similar? So long as it's post-tax and not directly to their accounts, any hurdles?

When a plan does a dependent eligibility audit and does not receive supporting documentation it requests for participants it now assumes may not be covered, what are the rules for removing a covered person or their beneficiary? What documentation can a plan request?

Question regarding “Integrated HRAs” for purposes of the exemption from the annual limit restrictions under the ACA: The recent Q&As under the January 24, 2013, FAQs about the Affordable Care Act Implementation (Part XI) that is available on the DOL’s website noted that an HRA is not considered “integrated” with and employer’s primary health coverage unless the HRA is available only to employees who are covered by the primary health plan (i.e., the employee must actually be enrolled in the primary coverage). What is left unsaid is the treatment of coverage for spouses and dependents—i.e., whether an employee must enroll their spouse and/or dependents in the primary health plan to receive reimbursements under the HRA for medical expenses incurred by the spouse and/or dependents. Based on the statement that an employee must actually be enrolled in/covered by the primary coverage for the HRA to be considered “integrated” it would make sense that the same requirements would apply for spouses/dependents, but I have seen no clear guidance on this aspect. If such is the case, employees who select “employee-only” primary coverage could only receive HRA reimbursements for their own medical expenses, not for medical expenses incurred by their spouse and/or dependents. To do otherwise would run the risk that the HRA is not “integrated” because the spouse/dependents could receive HRA benefits (subject to an annual limit) but not primary coverage (which would be unlimited). Has anyone seen any guidance on this? Thanks! Steve

(Pardon the multiple postings of this question, but I couldn't determine which forum it best fit under.) Question regarding “Integrated HRAs” for purposes of the exemption from the annual limit restrictions under the ACA: The recent Q&As under the January 24, 2013, FAQs about the Affordable Care Act Implementation (Part XI) that is available on the DOL’s website noted that an HRA is not considered “integrated” with and employer’s primary health coverage unless the HRA is available only to employees who are covered by the primary health plan (i.e., the employee must actually be enrolled in the primary coverage). What is left unsaid is the treatment of coverage for spouses and dependents—i.e., whether an employee must enroll their spouse and/or dependents in the primary health plan to receive reimbursements under the HRA for medical expenses incurred by the spouse and/or dependents. Based on the statement that an employee must actually be enrolled in/covered by the primary coverage for the HRA to be considered “integrated” it would make sense that the same requirements would apply for spouses/dependents, but I have seen no clear guidance on this aspect. If such is the case, employees who select “employee-only” primary coverage could only receive HRA reimbursements for their own medical expenses, not for medical expenses incurred by their spouse and/or dependents. To do otherwise would run the risk that the HRA is not “integrated” because the spouse/dependents could receive HRA benefits (subject to an annual limit) but not primary coverage (which would be unlimited). Has anyone seen any guidance on this? Thanks! Steve