Health and Welfare Plans Archives | Page 78 of 132

IRS Announces Employee Benefit Plan Limits for 2012

by McDermott Will & Emery | Oct 28, 2011 | Health and Welfare Plans

by Raymond M. Fernando, Diane M. Morgenthaler and Adrienne Walker Porter

The IRS recently announced the 2012 cost-of-living adjustments to the applicable dollar limits for various employer-sponsored retirement and welfare plans. Plan sponsors should update payroll and plan administration systems for the new 2012 cost-of-living adjustments and should incorporate the new limits in relevant participant communications, like open enrollment materials and summary plan descriptions. Also, because 2012 marks the first year that the IRS has increased employee benefit plan limits since 2009, plan sponsors may want to consider updating plan documents to include the new cost-of-living adjustments, to the extent such adjustments are not automatically incorporated by cross-reference. Please click here for a full list of the 2012 IRS limits.

Domestic Partner Developments- A Breakfast Discussion Sponsored by WEB Network

by McDermott Will & Schulte | Oct 7, 2011 | Employment, Health and Welfare Plans

Tuesday, October 25, 2011 (7:30am breakfast and networking, 8:00am program)

Since June 1, 2011, Illinois has recognizee civil unions, and insured employee benefits plans in Illinois must offer a civil union partner the same benefits as offered to an opposite-sex married partner. Other states, like New York, have recently gone further, and offer full recognition of same-sex marriages. Although federal law defines marriage as between only a man and a woman under the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal government now has refused to defend this law, and efforts are underway to repeal this legislation. In the midst of all these changes, what is the status of these developments? What are the market trends and best benefit practices for same-sex partners and domestic partners? Come hear the answers from Todd Solomon, the expert who literally wrote the book on this topic, and from a national employer who has implemented a comprehensive domestic partner benefits strategy and domestic partner tax gross ups.

Speakers:

Todd Solomon – Partner, McDermott, Will & Emery, and author Domestic Partner Benefits: An Employer’s Guide.
Cathy van Heukelum – Senior Manager, North America HR Operations, Bain & Company, Inc.

Cost Members: $30 Non-members: $50

Contact: Lynne McEvoy
Email: lynne.mcevoy@mcgladrey.com
Phone: 312.634.4490
Website: www.webnetwork.org
UBS Tower
One North Wacker Drive
2nd floor, Mighigan II ballroom
Chicago, IL 60606

New October 15 Deadline for Medicare Part D Creditable / Non-Creditable Coverage Notices

by McDermott Will & Emery | Oct 4, 2011 | Health and Welfare Plans

by Susan M. Nash and Elizabeth A. Savard

Group health plans that offer prescription drug coverage are required to issue a notice of creditable or non-creditable coverage to Medicare-eligible participants and beneficiaries each year prior to the annual Medicare Part D open enrollment period. In the past, the Medicare Part D open enrollment period ran from November 15 through December 31, so the notice had to be provided by November 15. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act moved the Medicare Part D open enrollment period earlier, beginning in 2011, to October 15 through December 7. Therefore, this year’s notice of creditable or non-creditable coverage must be provided by October 15, 2011.

A plan’s notice of creditable or non-creditable coverage describes whether prescription drug coverage under the plan is "creditable" — i.e., expected to pay out at least as much as standard Medicare prescription drug coverage, on average for all participants. This information is designed to help Medicare-eligible individuals avoid late enrollment penalties, which can apply when an individual who does not have creditable coverage fails to enroll in Medicare Part D when first eligible.

Plan sponsors will need to update their notices of creditable or non-creditable coverage to reflect the new dates for the Medicare Part D open enrollment period. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have updated their model notices of creditable and non-creditable coverage to reflect the new dates. No other substantive changes were made to the model notices. The updated notices are available here.

Fourth Circuit Upholds Health Care Reform Law

by McDermott Will & Schulte | Sep 9, 2011 | Health and Welfare Plans

by Michael T. Graham

On September 8, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed two lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care reform legislation, both on procedural grounds. In one case filed by the State of Virginia, the court dismissed a challenge to the legislation’s constitutionality finding that the State of Virginia did not have standing to challenge the law. The State of Virginia argued that the federal health care reform law conflicted with a state law that says no Virginia resident can be forced to buy health insurance. The court found that the only basis for the Virginia state law was “to declare Virginia’s opposition to the federal insurance mandate.” In the second case, the Fourth Circuit dismissed a challenge to the federal legislation’s constitutionality on the ground that the individual mandate was an improper tax on citizens. The court found that it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the case because federal law prohibits challenging a “tax” before it is collected. In this case, one dissenting judge wrote that jurisdiction did exist, but also stated that he would hold that the health care reform law was a constitutional exercise of Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause.

The Fourth Circuit is now the third federal Court of Appeals to rule on the constitutionality of health care reform. Previously, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the individual mandate under health care reform, while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit struck down the individual mandate requirements as being unconstitutional. There are several other lawsuits pending across the Country. These new decisions, along with the prior decisions from the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits, set the stage for the issue of the constitutionality of the individual mandate under health care reform to reach the Supreme Court of the United States, perhaps as early as its 2012 term.

Live Audio Conference: Why Is This Guy Still on My Health Plan?

by McDermott Will & Emery | Sep 6, 2011 | Health and Welfare Plans

Lorman Education Services Live Audio Conference

Why Is This Guy Still on My Health Plan?
September 26, 2011
1:00 pm (EST), (12:00 p.m. [CST], 11:00 a.m. [MST], 10:00 a.m. [PDT])

1 hour 30 minutes

Instructor: Amy Gordon, Co-Chair of McDermott Will & Emery’s Health and Welfare Benefits Group

Companies have encountered many situations where an employee remains on the company’s health benefits as an active employee for many years past the date in which the employee was actively at work for the company, both intentionally and unintentionally. This live audio conference will answer a common problem employers experience: what date should an employee be treated as a terminated employee when he/she is on a leave of absence or fails to return from a leave of absence, and how does this coordinate with the company-provided health and welfare benefits? This program will discuss the legal issues surrounding a leave of absence. It will explore how an employee may fall through the cracks and how to possibly change the administrative process. Finally, the program will address some of the potential pitfalls given the new Health Care Reform rules.

This live audio conference is designed for human resource managers, benefits administrators, payroll managers, controllers, CFOs, presidents, vice presidents, business and office managers, insurance professionals and attorneys.

Click here to register for the audio conference.

To receive a 20% discount courtesy of McDermott Will & Emery, please enter this code: 9696163.

HHS Releases Guidance Exempting Existing HRAs from Applying for Restricted Annual Limit Waivers

by McDermott Will & Emery | Aug 29, 2011 | Health and Welfare Plans

by Amy M. Gordon and Jamie A. Weyeneth

Under Health Care Reform, for plan years starting on or after September 23, 2010, health plans may impose only "restricted annual limits" on essential health benefits as defined by Health and Human Services (HHS). All annual limits are prohibited for plan years starting on or after January 1, 2014. HHS issued guidance for health plans seeking a waiver of the restricted annual limit for plan years beginning before January 1, 2014. On August 19, 2011, HHS released guidance exempting all health reimbursement arrangements (HRAs) that were in effect on September 23, 2010, from applying for a restricted annual limit waiver. This guidance effectively excuses existing HRAs (including stand-alone HRAs) from complying with the restricted annual limit on essential health benefits for all plan years beginning before January 1, 2014.

Webcast: Strategies to Deal with the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act

by McDermott Will & Schulte | Aug 15, 2011 | Health and Welfare Plans

Live Knowledge Congress Webcast
Strategies to Deal with the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act
September 13, 2011, Noon to 2 pm (EST)

Panel includes Susan Nash, Co-Chair of McDermott Will & Emery’s Health and Welfare Benefits Group.

The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (PPACA or “Health Reform Bill”) has been the subject of significant legal and policy debate since it was enacted in April 2010. The legislation has been both hailed as an important victory in the battle to improve the quality and accessibility of healthcare in the United States, and challenged as unconstitutional and ineffective in reducing medical costs and otherwise incenting choice and value in medical care and services.

Amidst this debate, legal and business strategies for dealing with the aspects of Health Reform that have been, or soon will be, implemented are often left in the background. These strategies are critical for ensuring compliance and optimizing business performance as PPACA rolls out. No matter how the broader policy or legal debate resolves, entities affected by PPACA must consider the Act’s impact on reimbursement, cost protection, and other day-to-day operational issues.

Strategies to Deal with the Patient Protection & Afford Care Act LIVE Webcast is a must-attend for healthcare professionals, health policy directors, health executives, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers and others who are interested in developing practical strategies to deal with healthcare reform. The Knowledge Group has assembled a panel of key thought leaders and regulators to discuss the fundamentals and updates regarding this topic.

Click here to register for the event.

To receive a discount courtesy of McDermott Will & Emery, please enter this code: will8992.

New Guidelines Issued on Preventive Services for Women, Including Religious Employer Exception

by McDermott Will & Schulte | Aug 2, 2011 | Benefit Controversies, Health and Welfare Plans

by Amy M. Gordon, Susan M. Nash and Jamie A. Weyeneth

The U.S. Departments of Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services recently released joint guidance regarding mandatory coverage of contraceptive services for women under the preventive services requirements of health care reform. The new guidance coincides with the issuance of expanded preventive care coverage requirements for women released by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).

Health care reform requires non-grandfathered group health plans and health insurance issuers to provide first-dollar coverage of certain preventive services furnished by in-network providers. The preventive services coverage requirements are based on recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and HRSA. In addition, HRSA was charged with developing additional preventive care and screening guidelines for women. HRSA commissioned the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to help to identify gaps in preventive care services already required under health care reform.

When the IOM released its recommendations in mid-July 2011, concerns about the inclusion of contraceptive services were raised by religious organizations. The regulators determined it would be appropriate to take into account the religious beliefs of religious employers and issued guidance providing for limited religious accommodation. Specifically, the interim final regulations on mandatory preventive care were revised to permit HRSA to create an exception for group health plans established or maintained by religious employers with respect to any requirement to cover contraceptive services. A religious employer is one that has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets; primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets; and is a nonprofit organization under Section 6033(a)(1) and Section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) or (iii) of the Internal Revenue Code. The regulators noted this approach is consistent with most states that require coverage of contraceptive services under state insurance laws. The final guidelines released by HRSA on August 1, 2011, include this exception for religious employers.

Click here to view the new women’s preventive services guidelines issued by HRSA. Recommended preventive services issued after September 23, 2009, are effective as of the first day of the first plan year/policy year beginning on or after the one-year anniversary of the date the recommendation is issued. Therefore, these new guidelines (including the religious employer exception) will apply for plan years/policy years beginning on or after August 1, 2012.

Potential Repeal of DOMA?

by McDermott Will & Schulte | Jul 27, 2011 | Health and Welfare Plans

by Joseph S. Adams, Todd A. Solomon and Brian J. Tiemann

As same-sex marriages began taking place over the weekend in New York state (click here for more information on the benefit implications of that development), another development that could have even more far-ranging implications for benefit plans also occurred last week. Specifically, last week the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on a bill entitled the “Respect for Marriage Act” which would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act’s (DOMA) definition of marriage for purposes of federal law as a union between one man and one woman. If the Respect for Marriage Act were enacted, it would — among other things — significantly complicate the administration of benefit plans on a multitude of issues such income tax inclusion, COBRA, death benefits, etc. (For more information, click here). There could also be significant confusion regarding whether a same-sex marriage entered into in one state can or must be recognized by another state; the federal DOMA inspired many states to enact their own mini-DOMA statutes, the constitutionality of which might be in question if the Respect for Marriage Act were enacted.

Legislative prospects for the Respect for Marriage Act are difficult to predict. However, consistent with the Administration’s position to stop enforcing portions of DOMA (click here for more information), the President has indicated his willingness to sign the Respect for Marriage Act if presented to him.

Same-Sex Marriage Legalized in New York: Implications for Employee Benefit Plans

by McDermott Will & Schulte | Jul 14, 2011 | Employment, Health and Welfare Plans

by Joseph S. Adams, Todd A. Solomon and Brian J. Tiemann

Now that same-sex marriage has been legalized in the state of New York, employers should expect to begin seeing an increase in requests for spousal benefit coverage from employees who have legally married their same-sex partners. The new law takes effect on July 24, 2011.

To read the full article, click here.

BLOG EDITORS

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

RECENT POSTS