News & Resources
Health Care Reform Update
7/19/2010 3:40:36 PM

Dear Valued Client:

As your trusted insurance advisor, we want to keep you updated regarding the latest regulations being released under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). This law will impact nearly every business and individual client, so we want to ensure that your company will be in compliance with its provisions.

Please click here for a Health Care Reform Timeline provided by the National Association for Health Underwriters summarizing what you can expect over the next several years. Many of the initial provisions, such as elimination of pre-existing conditions for children age 19 and under, will take effect on the first day of your plan year on or after September 23, 2010 (6 months following the date of enactment). It is also important to note that many fully-insured carriers are opting to implement some of these provisions in advance of the required effective date, such as the dependent age extension to age 26. Please let us know if you have questions about how your insurance carrier is handling these changes.

Of specific immediate concern is the provision regarding Grandfathered Plan status. Please click here for a description of Grandfathered Plan Requirements as provided by the National Association for Health Underwriters. If you decrease your plan's medical benefits, employer contributions or move coverage to another insurance company, you will lose your Grandfathered Plan status. At this time, it is unclear what the total impact will be for a company that loses its Grandfathered plan status. Many insurance companies have advised that Grandfathered vs. Non-Grandfathered plans will be pooled and rated separately. It is expected that Non-Grandfathered plans will have higher rates due to the additional coverage of benefits required by PPACA. We strongly urge you to consider any changes to your plan carefully before making a final decision.

Directly related to the Grandfathered Plan status is the issue of Management Carve-Out Plans and nondiscrimination rules as revised under PPACA. Please click here for details regarding the impact PPACA will have on these plans. Employers that have a management carve-out plan and employ 50+ full time employees (regardless of the size of the management care-out) will need to retain a Grandfathered Plan status or face very high excise tax penalties.

Please review this information at your convenience and let us know if you have any questions. We will continue to keep you updated as important additional information is released.

Sincerely,

Landry, Harris & Co.
Insurance & Risk Advisors
Posted by: Julie Monceaux | Submit comment | Tell a friend

Categories: Insurance News

Share and enjoy: Facebook   Google Bookmarks   Windows Live Bookmark   Yahoo Bookmark
8 Comments
8/16/2010 12:55:15 PM
How does the PPACA effect small employers (under 50), who offer medical benefits only to their management? It seems that management carve out penalty only applies to groups over 50. Thanks for any guidance you can offer. Chris
8/16/2010 2:55:00 PM
You are correct. The excise tax penalties for noncompliance with Sec. 105(h) nondiscrimination requirements does not apply for small employers between two and 50 employees. Therefore, absent further guidance, even small employers may be subject to Sec. 105(h) nondiscrimination testing on their insured group health plans, but because they would not be required to pay the excise tax penalty, there appears to be no specific consequence for failure to perform Sec. 105(h) testing for small employers.
9/8/2010 11:59:53 AM
When does the excise tax penalty for having a non-grandfathered management carve-out plan begin... 10/1/10?
9/8/2010 4:23:19 PM
Jeff, Certain requirements in IRC Sec. 105(h) were made applicable to insured group plans under the Public Health Service Act. Effective for plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010, an insured group health plan is prohibited from discriminating in favor of “highly compensated individuals” based on tests “similar to those used for self-insured plans.” For insured plans, there is an excise tax penalty for noncompliance with Sec. 105(h) nondiscrimination requirements. (The penalty does not apply for small employers between 2 and 50 employees.)
11/16/2010 1:26:17 PM
I have not read anywhere else that the excise tax penalty for non-compliance with Sec. 105(h)does not apply to groups under 50. Can you please provide where in the law this can be found?
11/17/2010 11:03:53 AM
The nondiscrimination testing requirements for insured group health plans were added as an amendment to the Public Health Services Act. There are no exceptions for small plans under this provision of Health Care Reform. Therefore, absent further guidance, even small employers may be subject to Sec. 105(h) nondiscrimination testing on their insured group health plans. However, because small employers with between 2 and 50 employees would not be required to pay the excise tax penalty, there appears to be no specific consequence for failure to perform Sec. 105(h) testing for small employers.

Please see the following IRS guidance regarding the excise tax penalty exception for certain insured small employer plans (between 2 and 50 employees) http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i8928.pdf.
12/8/2010 6:36:16 PM
How do you think this will be affected by the change in power in congress? Will the republicans be able to repeal it?
12/13/2010 11:00:15 AM
Landry Harris & Company recently sponsored a healthcare reform seminar for our group medical clients presented by Daniel Guillory of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC. He was of the opinion that the reform measures that are already set in motion would not be repealed. However, future provisions included in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could certainly be affected. With the recent elections, the Republicans do not have enough votes to overcome a presidential veto, which would most likely be the result of any efforts to repeal the law under the current administration. However, since the Republicans control the House of Representatives, they are likely to deny funding for further healthcare reform implementation. Of particular interest are the lawsuits challenging the individual mandate requiring most citizens to obtain federally-approved health insurance or pay a penalty. The recent election also resulted in a gain of Republican governors. Consequently, we could see an increase in states joining the fight to challenge this mandate through the court system.
Submit a Comment
Name
E-mail
Web Site
Comment
HTML tags are not allowed.

 

© Copyright 2012, Landry Harris & Co. All rights reserved.