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

Featured Jobs

Client Service Specialist

EPIC RPS
(Remote / Norwich NY)

EPIC RPS logo

Defined Benefit Specialist II or III

Nova 401(k) Associates
(Remote)

Nova 401(k) Associates logo

Retirement Plan Administrator

Compensation Strategies Group, Ltd.
(Remote)

Compensation Strategies Group, Ltd. logo

Senior Plan Administrator

Merkley Retirement Consultants
(Remote)

Merkley Retirement Consultants logo

Omni Operator

BPAS
(Utica NY)

BPAS logo

Census Coordinator

BPAS
(Utica NY / Hybrid)

BPAS logo

Distributions Processor - Qualified Retirement Plans

Anchor 3(16) Fiduciary Solutions, LLC
(Remote / Wexford PA)

Anchor 3(16) Fiduciary Solutions, LLC logo

Plan Installation Manager

July Business Services
(Remote / Waco TX)

July Business Services logo

Retirement Combo Plan Administrator

Heritage Pension Advisors, Inc.
(Remote / Commack NY)

Heritage Pension Advisors, Inc. logo

Implementation Specialist

Nova 401(k) Associates
(Remote)

Nova 401(k) Associates logo

Plan Administrator

DWC ERISA Consultants LLC
(Remote)

DWC ERISA Consultants LLC logo

Regional Sales Consultant

The Pension Source
(AL / AR / GA / KY / MS / TN / TX)

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. District Court Opinion: ACA Does Not Permit Cost-Sharing Reduction Payments to Insurers
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Link to more items from this source
May 13, 2016

"Section 1401 [of the ACA] provides tax credits to make insurance premiums more affordable, while Section 1402 reduces deductibles, co-pays, and other means of 'cost sharing' by insurers. Section 1401 was funded by adding it to a preexisting list of permanently-appropriated tax credits and refunds. Section 1402 was not added to that list. The question is whether Section 1402 can nonetheless be funded through the same, permanent appropriation. It cannot.... Such an appropriation cannot be inferred. None of Secretaries' extra-textual arguments -- whether based on economics, 'unintended' results, or legislative history -- is persuasive. The Court will enter judgment in favor of the House of Representatives and enjoin the use of unappropriated monies to fund reimbursements due to insurers under Section 1402. The Court will stay its injunction, however, pending appeal by either or both parties." [U.S. House of Representatives v. Burwell, No. 14-1967 (D.D.C. May 12, 2016)]  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).