The COBRA subsidy from the most recent COVID-19 stimulus bill – The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) – is now in effect. An assistance-eligible individual can have 100% of COBRA premiums subsidized for the periods beginning April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021. All plan sponsors must offer the subsidy – it is not optional.
Eligible former employees and spouses/dependents (qualified beneficiaries) can receive the subsidy if they are already on COBRA. In addition, individuals who declined or dropped COBRA coverage can elect into COBRA under a “second bite at the apple” election process, if they are still in the remaining period of COBRA coverage that would have applied originally. Read more
https://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png00adminhttps://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.pngadmin2021-04-06 11:32:442021-04-08 14:19:26These Boots Are Made For Walking…But If You Quit, You Might Not Get the COBRA Subsidy
Earlier this year, Bret Busacker explained the FSA relief enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA) in a blog post titled “Bridge Over Troubled Water: 2021 Flexible Spending Account Relief in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021.” The FSA relief in the CAA essentially permits employers to eliminate the “use it or lose it rule” for 2020 and 2021 and to permit mid-year FSA changes to both health FSAs and dependent care FSAs. The IRS recently issued additional guidance with respect to these FSA relief provisions in IRS Notice 2021-15 (the “Notice”). Read more
https://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png00adminhttps://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.pngadmin2021-03-10 10:15:182021-03-10 10:15:18Whoomp There It Is…The IRS Issues Further Flexible Spending Account Relief under Notice 2021-15
In sum, under last year’s DOL guidance, employers were required to disregard the period from March 1, 2020 until 60 days after the president declared the COVID Pandemic National Emergency over (the “Outbreak Period”) in calculating employee notices and election deadlines for deadlines including the following:
The 30-day period (or 60-day period, if applicable) to request special enrollment under ERISA
The 60-day election period for COBRA continuation coverage
The date for making COBRA premium payments
The date for individuals to notify the plan of a qualifying event or determination of disability under COBRA
The date within which individuals may file a benefit claim under the plan’s claims procedures
The date within which claimants may file an appeal of an adverse benefit determination under the plan’s claims procedure
The date within which claimants may file a request for an external review after receipt of an adverse benefit determination or final internal adverse benefit determination
The date within which a claimant may file information to perfect a request for external review upon a finding that the request was not complete
With respect to group health plans, and their sponsors and administrators, the date for providing a COBRA election notice
https://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png00adminhttps://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.pngadmin2021-03-02 13:50:282021-03-02 13:50:28If I Could Turn Back Time… And Then Add a Year
Employee benefit plans are subject to numerous laws that restrict, or at least limit, discrimination within the plans. Many benefit plan nondiscrimination rules focus on whether highly and non-highly compensated employees are receiving equal treatment under those plans; however, the recently enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA) is bringing some attention to an often-overlooked discrimination rule that prohibits group health plans from discriminating with respect to mental health and substance use disorder benefits (MH/SUD benefits). Read more
https://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png00adminhttps://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.pngadmin2021-02-26 09:16:572021-02-26 17:08:12But I Said No, No, No . . . New Requirement for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Benefits
Should auld acquaintance be forgot…not if they relate to the Affordable Care Act reporting requirements. In the midst of the flurry of health and welfare changes coming from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, employers can’t forget about the “auld” Affordable Care Act. Since the 2015 tax year, large employers of self-insured health plans have been required to report to employees and the IRS information regarding the health insurance offered. Form 1095-C is used to report this information to employees. There have been a few changes to the Form 1095-C for the 2020 tax year that employers should keep in mind: Read more
https://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png00adminhttps://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.pngadmin2021-02-10 14:07:012021-02-10 14:07:01Should Auld Acquaintance Be Forgot…Not If They Relate to the Affordable Care Act Reporting Requirements
The Covid-19 pandemic has created numerous challenges for retirement plan administrators. One such challenge is how to comply with the requirement to obtain a participant’s written signature to get a distribution from a qualified plan. In plans subject to the QJSA rules, the participant must sign in the presence of a notary or a plan representative. The plain language of the IRS regulation – requiring physical presence – would preclude the use of remote notarization. In June 2020, the IRS issued Notice 2020-42 that provided temporary relief from the physical presence requirement. In December, the IRS extended that relief through June 30, 2021 in Notice 2021-3. Read more
https://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png00adminhttps://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.pngadmin2021-01-25 10:16:502021-01-25 10:16:50I Would Walk 500 Miles … But Thankfully I Don’t Have To Since the IRS Will Still Permit E-Signature
On January 7, 2021, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission unveiled two Notices of Proposed Rulemaking regarding what employers can do to encourage workers to participate in corporate wellness programs without violating the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. The proposed rules mandate that employers “offer no more than de minimis incentives” to entice workers to take part in most wellness programs, but that employers can raise or lower workers’ insurance contributions by up to 30% (or 50% to the extent the wellness program is designed to prevent or reduce tobacco use), to encourage employees to take part in “a subset of wellness programs that are part of employer health plans.” Read more
https://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png00adminhttps://www.employeebenefitslawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.pngadmin2021-01-11 14:28:582021-01-11 14:28:58EEOC’s New Stand on Wellness Programs
These Boots Are Made For Walking…But If You Quit, You Might Not Get the COBRA Subsidy
/in DOL, ERISA, Health & Welfare Plans, IRS, Legislationby Brenda Berg
April 8 UPDATE: The COBRA subsidy model notices referenced in this article are now available: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/laws-and-regulations/laws/cobra/premium-subsidy. Employers should be working with their COBRA administrator on how to notify eligible individuals about the subsidy.
The COBRA subsidy from the most recent COVID-19 stimulus bill – The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) – is now in effect. An assistance-eligible individual can have 100% of COBRA premiums subsidized for the periods beginning April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021. All plan sponsors must offer the subsidy – it is not optional.
Eligible former employees and spouses/dependents (qualified beneficiaries) can receive the subsidy if they are already on COBRA. In addition, individuals who declined or dropped COBRA coverage can elect into COBRA under a “second bite at the apple” election process, if they are still in the remaining period of COBRA coverage that would have applied originally. Read more
Whoomp There It Is…The IRS Issues Further Flexible Spending Account Relief under Notice 2021-15
/in Cafeteria Plans, IRSBy Benjamin Gibbons
Earlier this year, Bret Busacker explained the FSA relief enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA) in a blog post titled “Bridge Over Troubled Water: 2021 Flexible Spending Account Relief in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021.” The FSA relief in the CAA essentially permits employers to eliminate the “use it or lose it rule” for 2020 and 2021 and to permit mid-year FSA changes to both health FSAs and dependent care FSAs. The IRS recently issued additional guidance with respect to these FSA relief provisions in IRS Notice 2021-15 (the “Notice”). Read more
If I Could Turn Back Time… And Then Add a Year
/in Cafeteria Plans, DOL, Fiduciary Duties, Health & Welfare Plansby Leslie Thomson and Brenda Berg
Last October, Brenda Berg posted a blog titled “I’m Just Waiting on an… End to the Extended ERISA Deadline Periods.” In that blog, Brenda explained that the IRS and DOL extended certain deadlines applicable to retirement plans and health and welfare plans.
In sum, under last year’s DOL guidance, employers were required to disregard the period from March 1, 2020 until 60 days after the president declared the COVID Pandemic National Emergency over (the “Outbreak Period”) in calculating employee notices and election deadlines for deadlines including the following:
Read more
But I Said No, No, No . . . New Requirement for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Benefits
/in DOL, ERISA, Health & Welfare Plans, Litigation, State Benefits LawsBy Kevin Selzer
Employee benefit plans are subject to numerous laws that restrict, or at least limit, discrimination within the plans. Many benefit plan nondiscrimination rules focus on whether highly and non-highly compensated employees are receiving equal treatment under those plans; however, the recently enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA) is bringing some attention to an often-overlooked discrimination rule that prohibits group health plans from discriminating with respect to mental health and substance use disorder benefits (MH/SUD benefits). Read more
Should Auld Acquaintance Be Forgot…Not If They Relate to the Affordable Care Act Reporting Requirements
/in Health & Welfare Plans, IRSby Becky Achten
Should auld acquaintance be forgot…not if they relate to the Affordable Care Act reporting requirements. In the midst of the flurry of health and welfare changes coming from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, employers can’t forget about the “auld” Affordable Care Act. Since the 2015 tax year, large employers of self-insured health plans have been required to report to employees and the IRS information regarding the health insurance offered. Form 1095-C is used to report this information to employees. There have been a few changes to the Form 1095-C for the 2020 tax year that employers should keep in mind: Read more
I Would Walk 500 Miles … But Thankfully I Don’t Have To Since the IRS Will Still Permit E-Signature
/in 401(k) Plans, Defined Benefit Plans, IRS, Retirement Plansby Beth Nedrow
The Covid-19 pandemic has created numerous challenges for retirement plan administrators. One such challenge is how to comply with the requirement to obtain a participant’s written signature to get a distribution from a qualified plan. In plans subject to the QJSA rules, the participant must sign in the presence of a notary or a plan representative. The plain language of the IRS regulation – requiring physical presence – would preclude the use of remote notarization. In June 2020, the IRS issued Notice 2020-42 that provided temporary relief from the physical presence requirement. In December, the IRS extended that relief through June 30, 2021 in Notice 2021-3. Read more
EEOC’s New Stand on Wellness Programs
/in Health & Welfare PlansThis post was originally featured on Holland & Hart’s Employer’s Lawyers Blog.
By Devra Hake
On January 7, 2021, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission unveiled two Notices of Proposed Rulemaking regarding what employers can do to encourage workers to participate in corporate wellness programs without violating the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. The proposed rules mandate that employers “offer no more than de minimis incentives” to entice workers to take part in most wellness programs, but that employers can raise or lower workers’ insurance contributions by up to 30% (or 50% to the extent the wellness program is designed to prevent or reduce tobacco use), to encourage employees to take part in “a subset of wellness programs that are part of employer health plans.” Read more