Subscribe (Free) to
Daily or Weekly Newsletters
Post a Job

Featured Jobs

Defined Benefit Plan Consultant/Actuarial Analyst

Sentinel Group
(Remote / Everett MA)

Sentinel Group logo

Strategic Retirement Plan Consultant

Retirement Plan Consultants
(Urbandale IA / Des Moines IA)

Retirement Plan Consultants logo

Retirement Plan Consultant

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Retirement Plan Administrator

Pattison Pension
(Albuquerque NM / Hybrid)

Pattison Pension logo

Retirement Plan Consultant

Sentinel Group
(Remote / Everett MA)

Sentinel Group logo

Data Administrator II

DWC - The 401(k) Experts
(Remote)

DWC - The 401(k) Experts logo

Temporary Document Specialist

BPAS
(Utica NY)

BPAS logo

Regional Vice President, Sales

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Retirement Relationship Manager

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

Plan Consultant - DB/CB

MAP Retirement
(Remote)

MAP Retirement logo

DC Administrator

Pension Investors Corporation
(Remote / Altamonte Springs FL)

Pension Investors Corporation logo

Plan Administrator, Defined Benefit & Cash Balance

The Pension Source
(Remote / Stuart FL / NY / TX / Hybrid)

The Pension Source logo

View More Employee Benefits Jobs

Free Newsletters

“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”

-- An attorney subscriber

Mobile app icon
LinkedIn icon     Twitter icon     Facebook icon

Text of D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion: ACA Subsidies Are NOT Legally Allowed for Policies Purchased on Federally-Run Exchanges (PDF)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Link to more items from this source
July 22, 2014

72 pages. Excerpt: "We conclude that appellants have the better of the argument: a federal Exchange is not an 'Exchange established by the State,' and section 36B does not authorize the IRS to provide tax credits for insurance purchased on federal Exchanges. We reach this conclusion by the following path: First, we examine section 36B in light of sections 1311 and 1321, which authorize the establishment of state and federal Exchanges, respectively, and conclude that section 36B plainly distinguishes Exchanges established by states from those established by the federal government. We then consider the government's arguments that this construction generates absurd results but find that it does not render other provisions of the ACA unworkable, let alone so unreasonable as to justify disregarding section 36B's plain meaning. Finally, turning to the ACA's purpose and legislative history, we find that the government again comes up short in its efforts to overcome the statutory text." [Halbig v. Burwell, No. 14-5018 (D.C. Cir. July 22, 2014)]  MORE >>

Please click here to report this link if it is broken (for example, if you see a "404 File Not Found" error message after you click on the linked news item's title).
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® created this link to the news item, but we are not the news item's author (unless expressly shown above).