Page 1 of 8
The Department of Labor released a comprehensive AI Literacy Framework providing employers with a roadmap for training workers to use artificial intelligence technology responsibly and effectively. The framework marks the Trump administration’s latest effort to prepare American workers for an AI-driven economy, emphasizing that “every worker will need baseline AI literacy skills to succeed, regardless of industry or occupation.” While the framework doesn’t create any new legal requirements, it signals DOL’s expectations for how employers should approach AI training – and offers practical guidance for organizations looking to upskill their workforce. Here’s an overview and steps you should take.
DOL’s AI Literacy Plan
The framework builds on the Trump Administration’s AI Action Plan released in July 2025. Both prioritize worker training and upskilling. It defines AI literacy as “a foundational set of competencies that enable individuals to use and evaluate AI technologies responsibly, with a primary focus on generative AI.”
Absent from this framework is any discussion of worker protections, discrimination safeguards, or new regulatory requirements. This marks a departure from the Biden administration’s approach, which emphasized AI guardrails alongside worker training.
Foundational Concepts
The DOL framework starts by identifying five core competencies it believes every worker should develop.
1. Understand AI Principles
Workers need to understand how AI operates, not technical mastery, but enough to use AI confidently. This includes understanding that AI identifies statistical patterns (not “thinking”), can produce incorrect outputs (“hallucinations”), and reflects human design decisions.
2. Explore AI Uses
Workers should understand practical applications across workplace settings: using AI to draft documents, analyze reports, answer questions, generate creative assets, or support decision-making. DOL emphasizes that AI use varies by industry and context.
3. Direct AI Effectively
Because AI depends heavily on user input, workers must learn how to provide clear instructions, include necessary context, and iterate to improve results. This includes prompt techniques, supplying relevant data, and avoiding vague requests.
4. Evaluate AI Outputs
Workers need skills to assess whether AI-generated outputs are accurate, complete, and appropriate. This includes verifying facts, spotting logical errors, and applying human judgment rather than treating AI as a final authority.
5. Use AI Responsibly
Workers must understand the boundaries of appropriate use: protecting sensitive information, following workplace policies, avoiding misuse, and maintaining accountability for AI-assisted work.
The 7 Delivery Principles for Employers
The framework also offers seven principles for how employers should deliver AI training.
1. Enable Experiential Learning
Training works best through hands-on use, not abstract reading. Employers should embed AI tools into real work tasks, provide interactive exercises, and allow trial-and-error learning.
2. Embed Learning in Context
Training should be relevant to workers’ jobs and industries. The training should also use industry-specific examples, align with actual workflows, and integrate AI literacy into existing training programs rather than creating standalone courses.
3. Build Complementary Human Skills
The guidance notes that AI amplifies human capabilities, it doesn’t replace them. Training should demonstrate how AI enhances critical thinking, creativity, and communication, emphasizing that AI’s value depends on human judgment.
4. Address Prerequisites to AI Literacy
Some workers may lack digital literacy, device access, or broadband connectivity. Employers should identify and address these barriers, ensuring all employees can engage with training.
5. Create Pathways for Continued Learning
Foundational AI literacy is just the starting point. Employers will want to provide clear routes for workers to deepen skills, pursue specialized training, or transition into AI-related roles.
6. Prepare Leadership to Lead
Train managers, coaches, and team leaders separately. Each leadership position will need skills to guide others, integrate AI into operations, and support workplace adoption.
7. Design for Agility
AI evolves rapidly. Companies should build training systems that can be updated regularly, use modular content that can be refreshed, and incorporate feedback to stay current.
What Employers Should Do Now
Interested in adopting the DOL’s new framework? Here’s where to begin:
Assess Current State of AI Use– Identify where workers are already using AI tools (officially or unofficially). Survey employees about AI adoption, review workflows where AI could add value, and determine which roles need AI literacy most urgently.
Recognize and Address Employee Relations Hurdles to AI Use– Recognize and address any emotional resistance that employees may experience in the face of integration in the workplace linked to fear of job loss, loss of identity, or diminished value. Provide clear communication about how AI is intended to enhance productivity, reduce administrative burden, and support (not replace) human judgment.
Develop or Update AI Training Programs– Use DOL’s framework as a starting point to build training that fits your industry and workforce. Focus on hands-on practice with tools workers will actually use, not abstract AI concepts. Integrate training into existing onboarding and upskilling programs rather than creating standalone courses.
Create Clear AI Use Policies– If you haven’t already, establish guidelines for appropriate AI use in your workplace. Address data protection, output verification requirements, prohibited uses, and accountability standards. Make sure workers understand the boundaries before they encounter problems.
Train Managers and Team Leaders First– Equip leadership with AI literacy before rolling out broader training. They need to understand AI capabilities, guide team adoption, address worker concerns, and model appropriate use. Managers who resist or misunderstand AI will undermine workforce training efforts.
Build Pathways Beyond Basic Literacy– Think about progression: Who needs advanced AI skills? Which roles might evolve significantly due to AI? How can high performers develop deeper AI proficiency? Create clear next steps for workers who master foundational skills.
Partner with External Resources– Consider leveraging state workforce development programs, community colleges, or industry associations for AI training. Many organizations signed the White House pledge to provide free AI education resources. DOL intends to help connect employers with these offerings.
We won’t pretend to have a crystal ball when it comes to what will happen in the labor and employment legal landscape in the new year, especially given the nature of modern-day politics. But despite the uncertainty, Fisher & Phillips’ developed their best predictions to help you plan for 2026. You can read the entire FP Workplace Law 2026 Forecast here, or you can dive into this Insight for the top 10 predictions pulled from our report.
Government Relations: DC Will Be Full Speed Ahead Once Again
The second Trump administration has been operating at a breakneck pace and there are no signs of that changing in 2026, especially with control of Congress on the line. The White House is aware that its agenda would face additional roadblocks if Republicans were to lose control of either the House or the Senate, so there will be concerted effort to move forward with the president’s priorities as soon as possible in the new year. This includes confirming judges to benches across the country (and potentially the Supreme Court if Justices Thomas or Alito retires), continued deportation efforts (especially given ICE’s boosted budget), and reducing the size of the federal government.
Immigration: An H-1B Lottery Overhaul is Coming
A growing series of pressures on the H-1B system in 2025 already brought heightened investigations, new fee requirements, intensified employer scrutiny, and a sweeping new social media vetting requirement for H-1B workers and their families.
In 2026, it is predicted that DHS will replace the current random H-1B cap lottery with a weighted selection system that gives higher-wage positions better odds of being chosen, potentially as soon as the March 2026 cap season. Even if litigation slows implementation this coming year, it’s likely to take effect during this administration. The change will heavily favor employers able to offer Level III–IV wages, making it harder for startups, non-profits, and entry-level roles to secure visas. This will force many organizations to rethink compensation strategies and diversify their global talent pipelines.
Artificial Intelligence: Bias Audits Will Become a Must-Have for Employers
Despite a recent executive order targeting “onerous” state AI laws, employers will continue to face a growing patchwork of state and local laws focused on combating AI bias in hiring and the workplace. And an AI bias audit is one of the most effective ways to identify and mitigate risk given the evolving state of AI-related laws springing up around the country. Indeed, plaintiffs’ attorneys are already using the absence of an audit as evidence of negligence or discriminatory design.
Wage and Hour/Pay Equity: State Enforcement to Step Up
States with robust wage and hour and wage payment laws (such as CA, IL, NJ, NY, WA) will continue to aggressively enforce their laws during a period when DOL enforcement activities may decline (in part, due to a reduction in the number of investigators). On the other hand, expect federal enforcement to continue to take a business-friendly approach, and expand the multiple compliance assistance programs it rolled out in 2025.
Fisher & Phillip’s also anticipates a noticeable uptick in pay equity litigation, fueled by well-publicized gender pay settlements and pro-plaintiff decisions in states with robust pay equity statutes. Use the F&P Pay Equity and Transparency Map to track state developments on pay discrimination laws.
Workplace Safety: New Leaders Promise a Business-Friendly Approach
New leadership will mean a new day for employers. Now that David Keeling is in place as the new head of OSHA and Wayne Palmer has been confirmed to lead MSHA, it is expected that efforts to increase outreach to industry will begin. For example, F&P predicts OSHA will issue few, if any, press releases after an employer is cited for safety violations. We also expect fewer regulations to be proposed or promulgated.
Labor Relations: The NLRB Will Begin Dismantling the Biden-Era Board’s Legacy
The Board should finally return to a legal quorum by early 2026. It will likely seek to overturn several significant Biden-era cases in the months thereafter, including rulings that addressed restrictions on workplace conduct rules, remedies available for unfair labor practices, and mandatory captive audience meetings, among other precedent-setting decisions. In response, unions are expected to abandon their reliance on the NLRB. This could mean an increase in labor grievances in union shops. Unions may also revisit recognitional picketing to pressure employers into recognizing them outside the election process.
Sports: Continued Battle Over Student-Athlete “Employee” Status
Both the DOL and NLRB were directed by President Donald Trump to clarify the status of student-athletes as part of a July executive order. While it’s unlikely the Trump administration will be willing to upend the current college sports model by deeming college athletes as employees who have collective bargaining rights and overtime protections, guidance from these agencies on the issue has yet to materialize.
Privacy and Cyber: Wiretapping Litigation Wave Will Keep Churning
In addition to continued proliferation of privacy laws at the state level, we expect the plaintiffs’ bar to continue the wave of wiretapping and related claims against businesses relating to the use of tracking technology on company websites.
While the statutes being used as ammunition in these lawsuits predate the internet, courts are allowing them to move forward across the country, exposing businesses to expensive class action litigation. This trend began primarily in California, but it has already expanded to other states. It is anticipated that it will continue to do so, unless or until state legislatures or courts directly address the application of wiretapping and other long-standing laws (that were intended for other purposes) to the use of tracking technology on websites.
International: Expanded Protections for Non-Traditional Workers
Multinational businesses should prepare for upcoming regulatory changes related to non-traditional workers, including freelancers and gig workers. For example:
Construction: AI Claims, Immigration Enforcement to Increase
As the adoption of drones and AI-driven tools become commonplace, issues around privacy, data protection, off-the-clock work, and workplace surveillance will require contractors to develop clearer policies and disclosures. Additionally, we expect wage-theft enforcement actions to expand in more states, leading to more audits and increasing the importance of compliance and record-keeping.
Increased I-9 audits and ongoing jobsite raids will also require employers to continue to be vigilant about verification and compliance. Fisher Phillips offers a Rapid Response Team for DHS Raids to support employers when an workplace enforcement action occurs at your business.
Courtesy of Fisher Phillips
While new presidents are typically judged based on their actions in their first 100 days, the current Trump administration has moved at such a rapid speed that we think another recap is needed at the halfway point. Here’s your employer cheat sheet on Trump’s first 50 days.
DEI and Equal Opportunity Compliance
Affirmative Action and Federal Contract Compliance
Department of Labor + Workplace Safety
Employee Defection and Trade Secrets
Artificial Intelligence
Education
Conclusion
The Trump administration has showed no signs of slowing down, and we expect that to continue throughout the next 50 days and beyond.
US District Court in Texas Sets Aside Overtime Rule
A rule that was set to dramatically boost the salary threshold for the so-called “white collar” overtime exemptions was just halted by a federal judge on Friday (Nov. 15th) less than two months before the full effective date. According to the court, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) exceeded its authority by raising the threshold too high and allowing for automatic adjustments every three years. The judge not only struck down the phase-two increase to $59K set to take effect on January 1, 2025 but also knocked down the first boost that took the salary floor to $44K in July and the automatic three-year adjustments – setting the threshold back to $684 per week. While it is expected that the DOL will appeal the ruling, many believe it’s not likely to gain any traction the incoming Trump administration. It’s also possible that an appeals court could step in and quickly reverse Judge Jordan’s ruling before President Trump takes office, but only time will tell.
Don’t Forget! An “old faithful” reporting requirement deadline is right around the corner: the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) filing and fee. The Affordable Care Act imposes this annual per-enrollee fee on insurers and sponsors of self-funded medical plans to fund research into the comparative effectiveness of various medical treatment options.
The due date for the filing and payment of PCORI fee is July 31 for required policy and plan years that ended during the 2023 calendar year. For plan years that ended Jan. 1, 2023 – Sept. 30, 2023, the fee is $3.00 per covered life. For plan years that ended Oct. 1, 2023 – Dec. 31, 2023 (including calendar year plans that ended Dec. 31, 2023), the fee is calculated at $3.22 per covered life.
Insurers report on and pay the fee for fully insured group medical plans. For self-funded plans, the employer or plan sponsor submits the fee and accompanying paperwork to the IRS. Third-party reporting and payment of the fee (for example, by the self-insured plan sponsor’s third-party claim payor) is not permitted.
An employer that sponsors a self-insured health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) along with a fully insured medical plan must pay PCORI fees based on the number of employees (dependents are not included in this count) participating in the HRA, while the insurer pays the PCORI fee on the individuals (including dependents) covered under the insured plan. Where an employer maintains an HRA along with a self-funded medical plan and both have the same plan year, the employer pays a single PCORI fee based on the number of covered lives in the self-funded medical plan and the HRA is disregarded.
The IRS collects the fee from the insurer or, in the case of self-funded plans, the plan sponsor in the same way many other excise taxes are collected. Although the PCORI fee is paid annually, it is reported (and paid) with the Form 720 filing for the second calendar quarter (the quarter ending June 30). Again, the filing and payment is due by July 31 of the year following the last day of the plan year to which the payment relates (i.e. filling for the 2023 PCORI fee is due by July 31, 2024)
IRS regulations provide three options for determining the average number of covered lives: actual count, snapshot and Form 5500 method.
Actual count: The average daily number of covered lives during the plan year. The plan sponsor takes the sum of covered lives on each day of the plan year and divides the number by the days in the plan year.
Snapshot: The sum of the number of covered lives on a single day (or multiple days, at the plan sponsor’s election) within each quarter of the plan year, divided by the number of snapshot days for the year. Here, the sponsor may calculate the actual number of covered lives, or it may take the sum of (i) individuals with self-only coverage, and (ii) the number of enrollees with coverage other than self-only (employee-plus one, employee-plus family, etc.), and multiply by 2.35. Further, final rules allow the dates used in the second, third and fourth calendar quarters to fall within three days of the date used for the first quarter (in order to account for weekends and holidays). The 30th and 31st days of the month are both treated as the last day of the month when determining the corresponding snapshot day in a month that has fewer than 31 days.
Form 5500: If the plan offers family coverage, the sponsor simply reports and pays the fee on the sum of the participants as of the first and last days of the year (recall that dependents are not reflected in the participant count on the Form 5500). There is no averaging. In short, the sponsor is multiplying its participant count by two, to roughly account for covered dependents.
The U.S. Department of Labor says the PCORI fee cannot be paid from ERISA plan assets, except in the case of union-affiliated multiemployer plans. In other words, the PCORI fee must be paid by the plan sponsor; it cannot be paid in whole or part by participant contributions or from a trust holding ERISA plan assets. The PCORI expense should not be included in the plan’s cost when computing the plan’s COBRA premium. The IRS has indicated the fee is, however, a tax-deductible business expense for sponsors of self-funded plans.
Although the DOL’s position relates to ERISA plans, please note the PCORI fee applies to non-ERISA plans as well and to plans to which the ACA’s market reform rules don’t apply, like retiree-only plans.
The filing and remittance process to the IRS is straightforward and unchanged from last year. On Page 2 of Form 720, under Part II, the employer designates the average number of covered lives under its “applicable self-insured plan.” As described above, the number of covered lives is multiplied by the applicable per-covered-life rate (depending on when in 2023 the plan year ended) to determine the total fee owed to the IRS.
The Payment Voucher (720-V) should indicate the tax period for the fee is “2nd Quarter.”
Failure to properly designate “2nd Quarter” on the voucher will result in the IRS’ software generating a tardy filing notice, with all the incumbent aggravation on the employer to correct the matter with IRS.
An employer that overlooks reporting and payment of the PCORI fee by its due date should immediately, upon realizing the oversight, file Form 720 and pay the fee (or file a corrected Form 720 to report and pay the fee, if the employer timely filed the form for other reasons but neglected to report and pay the PCORI fee). Remember to use the Form 720 for the appropriate tax year to ensure that the appropriate fee per covered life is noted.
The IRS might levy interest and penalties for a late filing and payment, but it has the authority to waive penalties for good cause. The IRS’s penalties for failure to file or pay are described here.
The IRS has specifically audited employers for PCORI fee payment and filing obligations. Be sure, if you are filing with respect to a self-funded program, to retain documentation establishing how you determined the amount payable and how you calculated the participant count for the applicable plan year.
The U.S. Department of Labor has increased the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA’s) annual salary-level threshold from $35,568 to $58,656 as of Jan. 1, 2025, for white-collar exemptions to overtime requirements. Effective July 1, 2024, the salary threshold will increase to $43,888. Employees making less than the salary-level threshold, such as hourly workers, can be eligible for overtime if they work enough hours.
Starting July 1, 2027, the department also will automatically increase the overtime threshold every three years..
To be exempt from overtime under the FLSA’s “white collar” executive, administrative and professional exemptions—the so-called white-collar exemptions—employees must be paid a salary of at least the threshold amount and meet certain duties tests. If they are paid less or do not meet the tests, they must be paid 1 1/2 times their regular hourly rate for hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek.
Takeaway for employers: Employers now must decide whether to raise the salary of those employees who earn above the overtime threshold under the old standard but below it under the new standard so they remain exempt. Employers that choose not to raise these employees’ salaries should be prepared to pay overtime to these employees when they work more than 40 hours in a workweek. Schedules for those employees whose salaries are not raised above the new threshold may need adjusting to limit overtime costs. Careful communication should be rolled out to explain why employees formerly categorized as exempt are now nonexempt.
On Tuesday, April 23, the U.S. Department of Labor announced a rule to significantly increase the salary level needed to qualify for the FLSA’s overtime exemptions applicable to executive, administrative and professional employees to $844 per week ($43,888 annualized). The rule will also increase the total compensation needed to qualify for exemption under the test for highly compensated employees to $132,964 per year. These figures will be effective on July 1, 2024, but will increase again as of January 1, 2025. On that date, the rule will increase the salary basis threshold to $1,128 per week ($58,656 annualized), and the threshold for exemption for highly compensated employees to $151,164 per year.
Under the rule, these salary levels will be subject to automatic increases every three years. While legal challenges to the new rule are expected, employers should not wait for those challenges to be resolved before assessing the rule’s impact on their operations and considering potential changes.
An “old faithful” reporting requirement deadline is right around the corner: the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) filing and fee. The Affordable Care Act imposes this annual per-enrollee fee on insurers and sponsors of self-funded medical plans to fund research into the comparative effectiveness of various medical treatment options.
The due date for the filing and payment of PCORI fee is July 31 for required policy and plan years that ended during the 2022 calendar year. For plan years that ended Jan. 1, 2022 – Sept. 30, 2022, the fee is $2.79 per covered life. For plan years that ended Oct. 1, 2022 – Dec. 31, 2022 (including calendar year plans that ended Dec. 31, 2022), the fee is calculated at $3.00 per covered life.
Insurers report on and pay the fee for fully insured group medical plans. For self-funded plans, the employer or plan sponsor submits the fee and accompanying paperwork to the IRS. Third-party reporting and payment of the fee (for example, by the self-insured plan sponsor’s third-party claim payor) is not permitted.
An employer that sponsors a self-insured health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) along with a fully insured medical plan must pay PCORI fees based on the number of employees (dependents are not included in this count) participating in the HRA, while the insurer pays the PCORI fee on the individuals (including dependents) covered under the insured plan. Where an employer maintains an HRA along with a self-funded medical plan and both have the same plan year, the employer pays a single PCORI fee based on the number of covered lives in the self-funded medical plan and the HRA is disregarded.
The IRS collects the fee from the insurer or, in the case of self-funded plans, the plan sponsor in the same way many other excise taxes are collected. Although the PCORI fee is paid annually, it is reported (and paid) with the Form 720 filing for the second calendar quarter (the quarter ending June 30). Again, the filing and payment is due by July 31 of the year following the last day of the plan year to which the payment relates (i.e. filling for the 2022 PCORI fee is due by July 31, 2023)
IRS regulations provide three options for determining the average number of covered lives: actual count, snapshot and Form 5500 method.
Actual count: The average daily number of covered lives during the plan year. The plan sponsor takes the sum of covered lives on each day of the plan year and divides the number by the days in the plan year.
Snapshot: The sum of the number of covered lives on a single day (or multiple days, at the plan sponsor’s election) within each quarter of the plan year, divided by the number of snapshot days for the year. Here, the sponsor may calculate the actual number of covered lives, or it may take the sum of (i) individuals with self-only coverage, and (ii) the number of enrollees with coverage other than self-only (employee-plus one, employee-plus family, etc.), and multiply by 2.35. Further, final rules allow the dates used in the second, third and fourth calendar quarters to fall within three days of the date used for the first quarter (in order to account for weekends and holidays). The 30th and 31st days of the month are both treated as the last day of the month when determining the corresponding snapshot day in a month that has fewer than 31 days.
Form 5500: If the plan offers family coverage, the sponsor simply reports and pays the fee on the sum of the participants as of the first and last days of the year (recall that dependents are not reflected in the participant count on the Form 5500). There is no averaging. In short, the sponsor is multiplying its participant count by two, to roughly account for covered dependents.
The U.S. Department of Labor says the PCORI fee cannot be paid from ERISA plan assets, except in the case of union-affiliated multiemployer plans. In other words, the PCORI fee must be paid by the plan sponsor; it cannot be paid in whole or part by participant contributions or from a trust holding ERISA plan assets. The PCORI expense should not be included in the plan’s cost when computing the plan’s COBRA premium. The IRS has indicated the fee is, however, a tax-deductible business expense for sponsors of self-funded plans.
Although the DOL’s position relates to ERISA plans, please note the PCORI fee applies to non-ERISA plans as well and to plans to which the ACA’s market reform rules don’t apply, like retiree-only plans.
The filing and remittance process to the IRS is straightforward and unchanged from last year. On Page 2 of Form 720, under Part II, the employer designates the average number of covered lives under its “applicable self-insured plan.” As described above, the number of covered lives is multiplied by the applicable per-covered-life rate (depending on when in 2021 the plan year ended) to determine the total fee owed to the IRS.
The Payment Voucher (720-V) should indicate the tax period for the fee is “2nd Quarter.”
Failure to properly designate “2nd Quarter” on the voucher will result in the IRS’ software generating a tardy filing notice, with all the incumbent aggravation on the employer to correct the matter with IRS.
An employer that overlooks reporting and payment of the PCORI fee by its due date should immediately, upon realizing the oversight, file Form 720 and pay the fee (or file a corrected Form 720 to report and pay the fee, if the employer timely filed the form for other reasons but neglected to report and pay the PCORI fee). Remember to use the Form 720 for the appropriate tax year to ensure that the appropriate fee per covered life is noted.
The IRS might levy interest and penalties for a late filing and payment, but it has the authority to waive penalties for good cause. The IRS’s penalties for failure to file or pay are described here.
The IRS has specifically audited employers for PCORI fee payment and filing obligations. Be sure, if you are filing with respect to a self-funded program, to retain documentation establishing how you determined the amount payable and how you calculated the participant count for the applicable plan year.
The U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division (WHD) published Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2023-02 providing guidance to agency officials responsible for enforcement of the “pump at work” provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) including those recently enacted under the 2022 PUMP Act.
The PUMP Act was adopted along with the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act when President Biden signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 in December 2022.
This guidance provides employers a glimpse into how the WHD understands and will enforce the rights now available to most employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act for reasonable break time and a place to express breast milk at work for a year after a child’s birth.
Here are a few highlights from the WHD’s bulletin.
The WHD also provides additional resources for employers on its Pump At Work webpage.
It has been previously discussed that President Biden announced an end to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE) and National Emergency (NE) periods on May 11, 2023, and the practical ramifications for employer group health plan sponsors as they administer COBRA, special enrollment, and other related deadlines tied to the end of the NE. As discussed, this action generally meant that all applicable deadlines were tolled until the end of the NE plus 60 days, or July 10, 2023, with all regular (non-extended) deadlines taking effect for applicable events occurring after that.
A Change in the National Emergency End Date
A new wrinkle recently added a potential complication to calculating these deadlines. President Biden signed H.R. Res. 7 into law on April 10, 2023, after Congress jointly introduced H.R. Res. 7 as a one-line action to end the NE, effective immediately. The consequence is that the applicable end of the transition relief is now June 9, 2023 (60 days following April 10, 2023) instead of July 10, 2023, as previously anticipated. The Department of Labor (DOL), however, has informally announced that despite the statutory end of the NE being 30 days earlier than expected, to avoid potential confusion and changes to administrative processes already in progress, the deadline of July 10, 2023, will remain the relevant date for COBRA, special enrollment, and other related deadlines under previous guidance. Prophetically, updated FAQs, released March 29, 2023, by the DOL, Department of Treasury, and Department of Health and Human Services (the Agencies), provide, “the relief generally continues until 60 days after the announced end of the COVID-19 National Emergency or another date announced by DOL, the Treasury Department, and the IRS (the “Outbreak Period”). [emphasis added]” Further clarification and formal guidance are still expected.
Updated DOL FAQ Guidance
Most employers rely on third-party vendors and consultants to help administer COBRA, special enrollments, claims, appeals, etc. All should be aware of the impact the end of the NE and PHE has on all applicable deadlines. The FAQs provide at Q/A-5 specific examples to help employers, consultants, and administrators apply the end of NE and PHE deadlines and different scenarios related to COBRA elections and payments before and after the end of the Outbreak Period, special enrollment events, Medicaid election changes, etc. The FAQs also make clear that employers are encouraged to consider extending these deadlines for the current plan year. Employers should discuss the impact of this guidance with their vendors and consultants to ensure all parties comply with the upcoming transitional periods.
The FAQs also confirm (at Q/A 1-4) the impact of the end of the PHE on COVID-19-related testing and diagnostic procedures, noting that as of the end of the PHE on May 11, 2023, group health plans are no longer required to provide certain COVID-19 related coverage at 100 percent under the plan, but can revert to previous cost-sharing and deductible limitations that existed before the COVID-19 pandemic. Note that President Biden’s recent action approving the end of the NE on April 10, 2023, has no impact on the previously communicated end to the PHE on May 11, 2023. Employers should review changes in coverage of COVID-19 testing and other related treatment or procedures with their insurance carriers, consultants, and advisors, including any notices that may be required in connection with those changes. The DOL confirmed that while encouraged to do so, employers do not have to provide any separate notification of any changes in current coverage limits before the PHE end date unless the employer had previously disclosed a different level of coverage in its current Summary of Benefits and Coverage (SBC) provided during the most recent open enrollment period.
COVID-19 Testing and Treatment Under High Deductible Health Plan/Health Savings Accounts
Q/A-8 of the FAQs provides interim clarification regarding the impact of the end of the PHE on high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) that are tied to health savings accounts (HSAs) and the ability to provide medical coverage for COVID-19 testing or treatment without requiring an employee to satisfy applicable HDHP deductibles for HSA contribution purposes. Even though IRS Notice 2020-15 provided relief from general deductible limitations under Code Section 223(c)(1) through the end of the PHE, the Agencies have determined this relief will remain in effect after the end of the PHE and until the IRS issues further guidance.