[Guidance Overview]
Novel IRS Guidance on HRAs, VEBAs and Domestic Partner Benefits (PDF)
"[An IRS private letter ruling to be published later this year] addresses the technical tax and benefit issues that arise when a Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) (funded through a Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Association (VEBA)) provides coverage to a domestic partner who does not qualify as a dependent under the Internal Revenue Code.... [1] The federal and state income and employment taxes reportable to the employee as a result of the coverage may be paid from the participant's individual HRA account.... [2] The VEBA will not lose its qualified tax-exempt status [provided certain requirements are met] ... [3] The VEBA is considered the 'employer' and is thereby obligated to conduct the tax withholding and reporting ... [4] The fair market value of the coverage provided to a non-dependent domestic partner is includible in the employee- participant's gross
income, and is considered wages for FICA, FUTA and income tax withholding purposes."
(Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP)
|
New Obamacare Delay Planned to Help Democrats in Midterm Elections
"As early as this week, according to two sources, the White House will announce a new directive allowing insurers to continue offering health plans that do not meet ObamaCare's minimum coverage requirements. Prolonging the 'keep your plan' fix will avoid another wave of health policy cancellations otherwise expected this fall."
(The Hill)
|
Corporate Wellness, Wearables Starting to Converge
"83 percent of employees surveyed said they're using apps or gadgets to track activity related to food and exercise, with the goal to improve overall health (37 percent), lose weight (29 percent) and satisfy curiosity about their health data (22 percent). The most popular gadgets are devices that measure weight, fat and blood pressure (47 percent), fitness devices worn as a bracelet (24 percent) and -- surprisingly -- gaming consoles or accessories that provide distraction during a workout (16 percent)."
(Healthcare Payer News)
|
Despite Delay of Key Provision, ACA Triggers Benefits Action Among Employers
"[N]early half (49%) of employers report they are extremely or very likely to make a high-deductible health plan their only health insurance option.... 73% of employers say the law is having an impact on benefits service and support and 69% report there is an impact on benefits communications.... Employees are increasingly confident more Americans will be covered under the [ACA] (43%, up 7 percentage points from 2012). An expanding number feel fewer employers will offer health insurance (44%, a 13 percentage point increase from 2012), and 38% of those employees believe their employer will drop coverage."
(Prudential)
|
GFOA Best Practice: Developing a Process for Complying with the ACA (PDF)
"The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends that state and local government employers that sponsor group health plans implement a process for reviewing federal health-care benefit requirements at least quarterly ... [and] should consider the following issues: [1] Staffing levels and expertise ... [2] Communicating with employees... [3] Maintaining grandfathered status .... [4] Complying with the requirements .... [5] Segregating retiree health-care plans .... [6] Examining coverage options .... [7] Preparing for fees and taxes .... [8] Special compliance considerations for self-insured plans.... [9] Preparing for potential penalties .... [10] Using state exchanges."
(Government Finance Officers Association)
|
Obamacare Exchanges: Less Choice, Higher Prices
"A 27-year-old male had, on average, ten more policies to choose from on eHealth versus the exchange and 31 more on Finder. A 27-year-old female had an average of ten more insurance options on eHealth and 38 on Finder. There were an average of nine more policies on eHealth and 19 more on Finder for a 57-year-old couple. Across all areas examined, the exchanges have resulted in a substantial reduction in choice.... Consumers also previously had more lower-cost options than they now have on the exchanges."
(National Center for Public Policy Research)
|
Employer Mandate Delay II: Nothing to See Here
"[M]odel results indicate that this additional delay until 2016, as compared to full enforcement, will result in: [1] Few workers losing coverage through their employer: the size of the workforce employed by non-offering large firms grows by 100,000 (or 0.1% of the workforce) from 2.3 million to 2.4 million workers. [2] Most firms continuing to offer coverage: the number of firms failing to offer coverage increases by 1,000 (or 0.02% of all firms) from 23,000 to 24,000 firms. [3] Modest revenue losses: the delay for medium-sized firms reduces federal revenue by $2.7 billion to $8.6 billion from the $11.3 billion that would have been collected in penalties if the employer mandate were fully enforced."
(RAND Corporation)
|
Chronically Ill Facing High Drugs Costs Under ACA
"Actuarial studies of plans sold through health insurance marketplaces in some states found that many make consumers responsible for as much as 50 percent of the price of specialty drugs, which can cost $8,000 or more a month.... Insurers say they had to move toward greater cost-sharing due to higher prices for new drugs, some of which can cost more than $100,000 annually per patient. Researchers also say the higher rates help insurers bankroll low monthly premiums to attract healthy young enrollees."
(Reuters via Yahoo News)
|
|
|
CMS Presentation: Timeline for QHP Certification (PDF)
34 presentation slides. Topics include: [1] 2015 QHP Certification; [2] Projected Changes to QHP Certification Process; [3] Issuer Data Collection and Coordination with States; [4] FFM Review of QHP Applications; [5] QHP Certification Process in a State Performing Plan Management Functions in an FFM.
(Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services)
|
[Opinion]
A Proposed Simple Solution to Obamacare's Employer Mandate Problems
"Employers that decide not to provide health coverage for their employees would be required to pay a percentage of payroll as a tax to cover health care, just like employers do now for FICA ... Instantly, the cliff impact is gone, both in terms of hours and number of employees. Employers could either provide coverage to all employees, or pay for health coverage in the same manner as FICA, a regular cost of adding an employee, with a marginal increase in cost for each hour someone works. There is no advantage to hiring someone for less than 30 hours or keeping under 50 employees.... Paying a percentage of payroll instead would make it much more affordable to hire low-and-middle income wage earners than it is now."
(The Huffington Post)
|
|
|
[Opinion]
Does Your Wellness Program Hurt Your Profit -- and Maybe Even Your Employees?
"Suppose a vendor made you this proposal: 'Pay us to take your employees off the job for medical tests that the government specifically says are unnecessary, and then send them to the doctor (at your expense) even though the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) says healthy adults don't benefit from checkups. We also want you to bribe or even fine employees to drive participation. Despite this adverse morale impact and wasted time and money, we promise you'll reduce your healthcare spending, mostly because we'll make up the savings numbers.' ... Think you'd decline this proposal? If you have a wellness program built around screenings, doctor visits, and 'incentives,' you've actually already accepted it."
(Al Lewis and Vik Khanna, for ChiefExecutive.net)
|
|
Benefits in General; Executive Compensation
|
Does Your Company Need to Seek Shareholder Approval of Your Incentive Plan in 2014?
"If the corporation's equity or annual incentive plan was last approved by shareholders in 2009, the plan(s) must be submitted to the shareholders for re-approval in 2014 in order to ensure that future awards qualify as performance-based compensation under Section 162(m).... Corporations should carefully review their proxy disclosures to ensure that they do not suggest or imply that the corporation's plan and awards will qualify as performance-based compensation under section 162(m). The use of language such as 'may comply' or 'is intended to comply' may protect the corporation from allegations of false or misleading statements in the proxy materials.... [C]orporations should establish and/or update grant procedures to ensure that awards are made in compliance with the plan's terms and that award limits are properly monitored."
(Bloomberg BNA)
|
IRS Confirms That Few Transfer Restrictions Will Delay Taxation of Equity Compensation
"The new final regulations add another potential opportunity for IRS scrutiny of the particular facts involved by stating that, in determining whether a substantial risk of forfeiture exists based on a condition related to the purpose of the transfer (i.e., a performance-based vesting condition), both the likelihood that the forfeiture event will occur and the likelihood that the forfeiture will be enforced must be considered. This seems intended to help the IRS prevent the use of vesting tied to financial hurdles that are likely to be attained to delay taxation."
(Towers Watson)
|
Section 83 and the 'Substantial Risk of Forfeiture'
"IRS took pains to emphasize that it did not intend the new regulations to change the law only to clarify it. Indeed, the new regulations mostly state settled law and common understanding.... The regulations reemphasize the IRS' long-held position that a provision or clause that may result in forfeiture of property transferred to an individual must be sufficiently likely to actually result in forfeiture in order to prevent taxation of the property upon transfer (or vesting)."
(Winston & Strawn LLP)
|
The Plan Sponsor's Role in Form 5500 Reporting: Not Just a Bystander
"[W]hat plan sponsors can do to facilitate the filing of clean/problem free returns: Establish with the preparer of the return a timetable for completion of the return.... Make sure you timely comply with responses made the return preparer.... If you are working with a CPA because your plan is subject to the [Independent Qualified Public Accountant (IQPA)] requirement, establish timetable with the CPA, too.... Make sure you review the report thoroughly and that you get it from the CPA with sufficient time prior to the filing date to do this review and discuss with the CPA and legal counsel, if necessary.... Review every line of the return and schedules."
(Fiduciary Plan Governance, LLC)
|
Employee Benefit Cases in the Supreme Court: A Review and Look Ahead
"2013 Supreme Court Decisions: [1] Section 3 of DOMA Unconstitutional ... [2] Welfare Plan Reimbursement Clauses... [3] Statute of Limitations... [4] Class Certification... Supreme Court Decisions Expected by June 2014: [1] Presumption of Prudence in Employer Stock Litigation... [2] Contraceptive Mandate... [3] Applicability of FICA to RIF-Related Severance Pay."
(Proskauer's ERISA Practice Center)
|
|
Press Releases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
