The Affordable Care Act will require Applicable Large Employers (i.e. large employers subject to the employer mandate) and employers sponsoring self-insured plans to comply with new annual IRS reporting requirements. The first reporting deadline will be February 28, 2016 as to the data employers collect during the 2015 calendar year. The reporting provides the IRS with information it needs to enforce the Individual Mandate (i.e. individuals are penalized for not having health coverage) and the Employer Mandate (i.e. large employers are penalized for not offering health coverage to full-time employees). The IRS will also require employers who offer self-insured plans to report on covered individuals.
Large employers and coverage providers must also provide a written statement to each employee or responsible individual (i.e. one who enrolls one or more individuals) identifying the reported information. The written statement can be a copy of the Form.
The IRS recently released draft Forms 1094-C and 1095-C and draft Forms 1094-B and 1095-B, along with draft instructions for each form.
Which Forms Do I File?
When?
Statements to employees and responsible individuals are due annually by January 31. The first statements are due January 31, 2016.
Forms 1094-B, 1095-B, 1094-C and 1095-C are due annually by February 28 (or by March 31, if filing electronically). The first filing is due by February 28, 2016 (or March 31, 2016, if filing electronically).
Even though the forms are not due until 2016, the annual reporting will be based on data from the prior year. Employers need to plan ahead now to collect data for 2015. Many employers have adopted the Look Back Measurement Method Safe Harbor (“Safe Harbor”) to identify full-time employees under the ACA. The Safe Harbor allows employers to “look back” on the hours of service of its employees during 2014 or another measurement period. There are specific legal restrictions regarding the timing and length of the periods under the Safe Harbor, so employers cannot just pick random dates. Employers also must follow various rules to calculate hours of service under the Safe Harbor. The hours of service during the measurement period (which is likely to include most of 2014) will determine whether a particular employee is full-time under the ACA during the 2015 stability period. The stability period is the time during which the status of the employee, as full-time or non-full-time, is locked in. In 2016, employers must report their employees’ full-time status during the calendar year of 2015. Therefore, even though the IRS forms are not due until 2016, an employee’s hours of service in 2014 will determine how an employer reports that employee during each month of 2015. Employers who have not adopted the Safe Harbor should consider doing so because it allows an employer to average hours of service over a 12-month period to determine the full-time status of an employee. If an employer does not adopt the Safe Harbor, the IRS will require the employer to make a monthly determination, which is likely to increase an employer’s potential exposure to penalties.
What Must the Employer Report?
Form 1095-C
There are three parts to Form 1095-C. An applicable large employer must file one Form 1095-C for each full-time employee. If the applicable large employer sponsors self-insured health plans, it must also file Form 1095-C for any employee who enrolls in coverage regardless of the full-time status of that employee.
Form 1095-C requires the employer to identify the type of health coverage offered to a full-time employee for each calendar month, including whether that coverage offered minimum value and was affordable for that employee. Employers must use a code to identify the type of health coverage offered and applicable transition relief.
Employers that offer self-insured health plans also must report information about each individual enrolled in the self-insured health plan, including any full-time employee, non-full-time employee, employee family members, and others.
Form 1094-C
Applicable large employers use Form 1094-C as a transmittal to report employer summary information and transmit its Forms 1095-C to the IRS. Form 1094-C requires employers to enter the name and contact information of the employer and the total number of Forms 1095-C it submits. It also requires information about whether the employer offered minimum essential coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan to at least 95% of its full-time employees and their dependents for the entire calendar year, the number of full-time employees for each month, and the total number of employees (full-time or non-full-time) for each month.
Form 1095-B
Employers offering self-insured coverage use Form 1095-B to report information to the IRS about individuals who are covered by minimum essential coverage and therefore are not liable for the individual shared responsibility payment. These employers must file a Form 1095-B for eachindividual who was covered for any part of the calendar year. The employer must make reasonable efforts to collect social security numbers for covered individuals.
Form 1094-B
Employers who file Form 1095-B will use Form 1094-B as a transmittal form. It asks for the name of the employer, the employer’s EIN, and the name, telephone number, and address of the employer’s contact person.
Failure to Report – What Happens?
The IRS will impose penalties for failure to timely provide correct written statements to employees. The IRS will also impose penalties for failure to timely file a correct return. For the 2016 reporting on 2015 data, the IRS will not impose a penalty for good faith compliance. However, the IRS specified that good faith compliance requires that employers provide the statements and file the returns.
On November 7th, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear King v. Burwell. The case will argue whether or not subsidies in the marketplace should be limited to states with state-run Exchanges. According to the New York Times, “If the challengers are right, millions of people receiving subsidies (through the federal Exchange) would become ineligible for them, destabilizing and perhaps dooming the law.” Arguments are due to begin in December, and a ruling will be issue by next June.
The key question in the case deals with the conflicting IRS ruling stating that “subsidies are allowed whether the exchange is run by a state or by the federal government.” Those challenging the law in this case say that this rule conflicts with the statutory language set forth in the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Two lower courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Halbig v. Burwell and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in King v. Burwell, have already issued conflicting opinions regarding the IRS’ authority to administer subsidies in federally facilitated Exchanges. In addition, two other cases are being litigated in the lower courts on the same issue. In Pruitt v. Burwell, a district court in Oklahoma ruled against the IRS in September, and a decision in a fourth court case, Indiana v. IRS, is expected shortly. Of course, the Supreme Court ruling could render the lower court decisions moot.
The Department of Labor has just published a series of FAQs regarding premium reimbursement arrangements. Specifically, the FAQs address the following arrangements:
Situation #1: An arrangement in which an employer offers an employee cash to reimburse the purchase of an individual market policy.
When an employer provides cash reimbursement to the employee to purchase an individual medical policy, the DOL takes the position that the employer’s payment arrangement is part of a plan, fund, or other arrangement established or maintained for the purpose of providing medical care to employees, regardless of whether the employer treats the money as pre or post tax to the employee. Therefore, the arrangement is considered a group health plan that is subject to the market reform provisions of the Affordable Care Act applicable to group health plans and because it does not comply (and cannot comply) with such provisions, it may be subject to penalties.
Situation #2: An arrangement in which an employer offers employees with high cost claims a choice between enrollment in its group health plan or cash.
The DOL takes the position that offering a choice between enrolling in the group health plan or cash only to employees with a high claims risk would be discriminatory based on one or more health factors. The DOL states that such arrangements will violate such nondiscrimination provisions regardless of whether (1) the cash payment is treated by the employer as pre-tax or post-tax to the employee, (2) the employer is involved in the selection or purchase of any individual medical policy, or (3) the employee obtains any individual health insurance. The DOL also notes that such an arrangement, depending on facts and circumstances, could result in discrimination under an employer’s cafeteria plan.
Situation #3: An arrangement where an employer cancels its group policy, sets up a reimbursement plan (like an HRA) that works with health insurance brokers or agents to help employees select individual insurance policies, and allows eligible employees to access the premium tax credits for Marketplace coverage.
The DOL takes the position that such an arrangement is a considered a group health plan and, therefore, employees participating in such arrangement are ineligible for premium tax credits (or cost-sharing reductions) for Marketplace coverage. The DOL also takes the position that such arrangements are subject to the market reform provisions of the ACA and cannot be integrated with individual market policies to satisfy the market reforms. Thus, such arrangements can trigger penalties.
Key Takeaway
There has been quite a bit of banter regarding whether any of the foregoing arrangements could be an effective way for employers to avoid complying with the market reforms and other provisions of the Affordable Care Act applicable to group health plans. These FAQs are a strong indication that the DOL will be forceful in its interpretation and enforcement of these provisions.
On November 4, 2014, the IRS released Notice 2014-69 which outlines that health plans that fail to provide substantial coverage for in-patient hospitalization services or for physician services (or both) referred to as Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan) are now not considered as providing the minimum value coverage as intended by the minimum value plan requirements for the employer mandate under ACA.
For employers who have already entered into a binding written commitment to adopt, or have begun enrolling employees in, a Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan prior to November 4, 2014, they will not be penalized for not meeting the employer mandate for the 2015 plan year if that plan year begins no later than March 1, 2015. This is based on the employer’s reliance on the results of the Minimum Value Calculator (a Pre-November 4, 2014 Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan) as outlined in previous guidance.
For employers who have not entered in to a written commitment to adopt, have not begun enrolling employees in a Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan on or after November 4, 2014, or have a plan year that begins after March 1,2015, no relief will be given under the employer mandate.
Pending final regulations, employees will not be required to treat a Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan as providing minimum value coverage for purposes of determining their eligibility for a premium tax credit “aka premium subsidy” in the Marketplace.
An employer that offers a Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan (including a Pre-November 4, 2014 Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan) to an employee:
(1) must not state or imply in any disclosure that the offer of coverage under the Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan prevents an employee from obtaining a premium tax credit, if otherwise eligible, and
(2) must timely correct any prior disclosures that stated or implied that the offer of the Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan would prevent an otherwise tax-credit-eligible employee from obtaining a premium tax credit.
Without such a corrective disclosure, a statement a Non-Hospital/Non-Physician Services Plan provides minimum value will be considered to imply that the offer of such a plan prevents employees from obtaining a premium tax credit/subsidy. However, an employer that also offers an employee another plan that is not a Non-Hospital/Non/-Physician Services Plan and that is affordable and provides minimum value is permitted to advise the employee that the offer of this other plan will or may preclude the employee from obtaining a premium tax credit.
The deadline for submitting the required information and scheduling the requirement payment, which must be done through www.pay.gov is November 15, 2014.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides for a transitional reinsurance program to help stabilize premiums for coverage in the individual health insurance marketplace during the first 3 years of operation (2014-2016). The program is designed to primarily transfer funds from the group market to the individual market, where high risk individuals are more likely to be covered.
Payments under the reinsurance program are funded by “contributions” (aka fees) payable by health insurance carriers for fully funded groups and third party administrators on behalf of self-insured group health plans. However, under ACA regulations, the self insured group is ultimately responsible for the payment.
The transitional reinsurance fee requirement applies on a per capita basis with respect to each individual covered by a plan that is subject to the fee. The total amount of the fee for 2014 is $63 per covered life and will decrease to $44 per covered life in 2015. The amount of the fee in 2016 has not yet been established by CMS, but will be lower than the 2015 amount. The fee applies to major medical coverage, retiree medical coverage, and COBRA coverage. Plans that are not subject to the reinsurance fee include FSAs, HSAs, Dental & Vision coverage, coverage that fails to provide minimum value, and EAP programs to name a few.
The transitional reinsurance fee is imposed on the “contributing entity”, defined as an insurer/carrier for fully-insured coverage or the group for self insured coverage. Third -party administrators (TPAs), administrative service only entities (ASO) and others may submit on behalf of the contributing entity, though CMS has specified that the TPA or ASO is not required by law to do so.
Because the fee is imposed on the self insured plan and not the plan sponsor, plan assets may be used to pay the assessment/fee. The IRS has also noted that plan sponsors can treat the fee as an ordinary and necessary business expense for tax purposes.
The term covered lives includes everyone under the plan, including spouses, dependents, and retirees. CMS has named several options for counting covered lives, depending on if the plan is fully insured or self funded. The methods of counting covered lives for the reinsurance fee are similar to, but not exactly the same, as the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) count methods. A full description of each counting method can be found on the CMS website here.
Regardless of the counting method chosen, plans must maintain documentation of the count, including all materials provided by TPAs in arriving at the figure, for at least 10 years. CMS may audit a plan to assess its compliance with the program requirements and it will be crucial to be able to produce this information.
The entire reinsurance fee process takes place on www.pay.gov. This process is separate from the Health Insurance Oversight System (HIOS) which is used, for example, to obtain a Health Plan Identifier (HPID). The applicable form became available on October 24, 2014. While this leaves somewhat limited time for plan sponsors to submit the applicable form and schedule the fee by the November 15, 2014 deadline, CMS has yet to issue guidance that the submission date will be delayed.
In order to successfully complete the reinsurance fee submission, plan sponsors (or their representatives) need to:
After registering on Pay.gov, the submitter will select the Transitional Reinsurance program Annual Enrollment and Contribution Submission Form. The form requires basic company and contact info, payment type, benefit year, and the annual enrollment count. After the information is entered on the form, plan sponsors will need to upload their supporting documentation CSV file. After the enrollment and supporting documentation is submitted, the form will auto-calculate the amount owed. Plans then need to schedule payment(s) for this amount . The form cannot be submitted without payment information. Plans can choose to remit payment for the entire benefit year once (the full $63 per covered life) or plans can submit two separate payments for the year. If the separate payment method is used, the first payment ($52.50 per covered life) is due by January 15, 2015 and the second payment ($10.50 per covered life) is due by November 15, 2015. Regardless of the option chose, all payments MUST be scheduled by November 15, 2014.
The IRS and Social Security Administration released the 2015 cost-of-living (COLA) adjustments that apply to health flexible spending accounts (FSAs) in Revenue Procedure 2014-61. The new annual limit for health FSAs, including general-purpose and limited-purpose health FSAs, is $2,550 for plan years starting on or after January 1, 2015.
The $2,550 limit is prorated for short plan years (plan years that are shorter than 12 months) and any carry over amount from participants’ previous plan years may be added to the limit. For instance, participants may elect $2,550 for the 2015 plan year and carry over a maximum of $500 from the previous plan year, making their total account value $3,050 for the 2015 plan year. In other words, the $500 carryover does not count against or affect the $2,550 salary reduction limit. Please note that an employer must decide to allow to either offer participants a option of a max $500 carryover OR the 2.5 month extension to use funds. An employer can not offer both options under their plan.
The rush for group health plan administrators to navigate the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) website and obtain a Health Plan Identifier (HPID) ahead of the November 5th deadline is over. On October 31, 2014, the CMS Office of e-Health Standards and Services (OESS), the division of the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) that is responsible for enforcement of the HIPAA standard transaction requirements, announced a “delay, until further notice,” of the HPID requirements. The regulatory obligations of plan administrators delayed by this notice are the: (i) obtaining of a HPID, and (ii) the use of the HPID in HIPAA transactions.
This delay comes on the heels of a recommendation by the National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS), an advisory body to HHS. The NCVHS asked HHS to review the HPID requirement and recommended that HPIDs not be used in HIPAA transactions. NCVHS’s primary opposing argument to implementation of the HPID standard was that the healthcare industry has already adopted a “standardized national payer identifier based on the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) identifier.”
Whether HHS will adopt the recommendations of the NCVHS on a permanent basis remains to be seen, but for the time being, plan administrators may discontinue the HPID application process and should stay tuned for further announcements from HHS.
Health Care Reform requires most self-funded and fully-insured group health plans to obtain a Health Plan Identifier (HPID). The HPID is a 10-digit number that will be used to identify the plan in covered electronic HIPAA transactions (for example,electronic communications between the plan and certain third parties regarding health care claims, health plan premium payments, or health care electronic fund transfers).
Large health plans (plans with annual receipts in excess of $5 million) must obtain an HPID by November 5, 2014. Small health plans have until November 5, 2015 to comply. “Receipts” for this purpose appear to be claims paid.
Who is Responsible? For self-funded plans, the plan sponsor is responsible for obtaining an HPID (third-party administrators cannot obtain an HPID on behalf of a self-funded plan sponsor). Although it appears that most insurers will obtain the HPID on behalf of fully-insured plans, some insurers are requiring the plan sponsor to obtain an HPID.
Application Process. To sign up for an HPID, plan sponsors must first be registered within the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) Health Insurance Oversight System (HIOS) .
The individual responsible for applying will need to sign up as an individual and request to be linked to the relevant company. The individual will then complete the requested information (including company name, address, and EIN, authorizing official information, and the plan’s “Payer ID” number or “NAIC” number).
Some self-funded plan sponsors have reported difficulty with the registration process because self-funded plans do not have a Payer ID or NAIC number. Although CMS has not yet released any formal guidance on this issue, it is expected that self-funded plans will enter “not applicable” for the Payer ID and either leave the NAIC number blank or use the plan sponsor’s EIN in lieu of the NAIC number.
Once the required information has been submitted, an authorized individual within the company must request access to the HIOS. CMS will then grant access to the HIOS system by electronically sending an authorization code to the authorized individual.
The CMS website has step-by-step instructions via a “cheat sheet” and a YouTube video explaining the entire process.
Next Steps. The registration process can be time consuming as there are a number of different registration screens to work through, the collection of the required data may be cumbersome, and delays have been reported within the CMS registration portal. Accordingly, plan sponsors of large self-funded group health plans may wish to begin the registration process as soon as possible in order to meet the November 5, 2014 deadline. Plan sponsors for fully-insured plans should contact the plan’s insurer to see if the insurer will apply for the HPID on behalf of the plan.
Employers must provide a creditable or non-creditable coverage notice at least once a year to all Medicare eligible individuals who are covered under, or who apply for, the group’s prescription drug plan. This notice must be provided to both active employees and retirees who are eligible for Medicare Part D.
The Medicare Modernization Act mandates that all employers offering prescription drug coverage disclose to all Medicare eligible individuals with prescription drug coverage under the plan whether the coverage is “creditable”. This information is essential to the Medicare eligible’s decision whether to enroll in a Medicare Part D prescription drug plan.
Employers are required by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to provide creditable coverage at least once a year and at the following times:
This notice does not need to be a separate mailing and can be included with other plan information materials either printed or electronic. Employers are required to provide this notice and to provide CMS with your plan’s creditable or non-creditable coverage status annually via online form within 60 days of the beginning of each plan year.
Please contact our office for assistance in determining if your prescription drug plan is considered creditable or non-creditable coverage or if you need a copy of the model notice for employees.
Fisher & Phillips has recently released a Family Medical & Leave Act (FMLA) Calculator App. This free, award-winning app is available for smartphones and tablets. There’s even a version you can use in your web browser. Please visit www.laborlawyers.com/FMLALeaveApp for links to download the Android and iOS versions, or to launch the web browser version on your computer.
The app helps employers calculate leaves of absence under FMLA. Anyone managing people can use the app to calculate leave requests (other than intermittent and reduced schedule) and determine how much FMLA leave an employee has available. The user-friendly interface works very simply. In seconds a manager is able to see how much FMLA leave an employee has available, when an employee should return to work after the current leave request, and how much FMLA leave is remaining, if any.
The app features include:
The app reports the number of days of leave available, when the employee should return to work based on the new leave request, and how much leave, if any, the employee has remaining after the current leave request is completed.
Human Resources or any other manager using the app can email the information directly to the employee who requested the leave. Of course, further documentation to the employee should be provided as required by the FMLA.
Please note: The FMLA Leave App should not be construed as or relied upon for legal advice. The Family and Medical Leave Act is a complicated law and it is difficult to anticipate the various circumstances that may arise in handling requests for leave. The contents are intended for general information purposes only and are only able to calculate leaves in limited circumstances.