• Link to Facebook
  • Link to LinkedIn
Cleary Insurance
  • HOME
  • ABOUT US
    • WHO WE ARE
    • EMPLOYEE DIRECTORY
    • INSURANCE COMPANIES
  • COVERAGES
    • COMMERCIAL INSURANCE
    • PERSONAL INSURANCE
    • LIFE INSURANCE
    • GROUP BENEFITS
  • BLOG
  • CUSTOMER STORIES
  • SELF SERVICE InsurLink
  • CONTACT
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu
Home1 / Blog2 / News3 / ACA Breaking News

ACA Breaking News

July 22, 2014/in News/by Carol LaCombe

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has dealt a serious blow to the Obama Administration today with a decision that calls into question the structural integrity of the “pay-or-play” mandates under the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).

Background:

The plain language of the Affordable Care Act states individuals purchasing coverage from a state exchange are eligible for the federal subsidy. The ACA, on its face, does not provide for a subsidy on the federal exchanges. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) addressed this in May 2012 through a regulation, providing that an individual could obtain a subsidy if he or she “is enrolled in one or more qualified health plans through an Exchange.” In the same regulation, the IRS defined an exchange to include both state and federal exchanges. In other words, the IRS sought, by regulation rather than by amending the law, to clarify that the ACA provides the subsidy on both state and federal exchanges.

What Does This Mean To Employers:

This is significant to employers because one of the triggers for assessment of a penalty against an employer under the ACA is that a full-time employee has obtained subsidized coverage on an exchange. Any employer based in a state with federally-run exchanges could be free from the employer mandate ($2,000 and $3,000 penalties effective in 2015). This applies to a majority of the states across the country and could have an even greater impact on the enforceability of the ACA.

What Does This Mean for Your Planning Under the ACA:

This is far from the final word on this issue and just 2 hours later, a Richmond, VA appeals court reached the opposite decision and upheld the IRS rule stating the law covers both state and federally run exchange subsidies. The decision could be reviewed by the full DC Circuit Appellate Court, which has a majority (seven) of its active judges appointed by Democratic presidents and four appointed by Republicans. It may eventually be decided by the US Supreme Court, but that may be a long way off. There is also a chance that this could result in overdue bi-partisan discussions in Congress to address this and other ACA issues. At this point, however, it is clear that at least one high-level federal court has suggested that the entire pay–or-play approach may be in jeopardy in a majority of states.

Unfortunately for employers, it is likely that your renewal planning and implementing the benefits program in time for the start of your 2015 plan year might have to continue without clear direction if the employer mandate will be enforced if you are in a state with a federally run Exchange. The Obama administration stated it will appeal the decision and said people would continue to receive the subsidies during the appeal, which is the only way an employer would receive a penalty.

Background on the Court Decision:

In Halbig v. Burwell, the Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit, sitting in Washington, DC, sided with the plaintiffs and against the Obama Administration today when it held that the ACA, by its terms, does not allow for subsidies for individual coverage in exchanges established by the federal government. This means that, at least according to this court, individuals purchasing insurance coverage on the federally-run exchanges will not be eligible for federal subsidies when they purchase insurance.

In Halbig, the plaintiffs challenged the IRS’s ability as a regulator to, in the plaintiffs’ perspective, rewrite the statute. The district court agreed with the Obama Administration, finding that the context of the ACA supported the IRS’s clarification. The appellate court disagreed, however. In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court found that there was no basis to support the contextual reading and effectively found that the IRS had exceeded its regulatory authority.

Next Steps and Webinar:

Stay tuned as more information is clarified. We are hosting several webinars over next 2 weeks due to an overwhelming request for support. Register at the link below and state your date/time preference:

The webinar will last 1 hour and we will take any questions/requests prior to and throughout the presentations. If there are additional topics you’d like to see, please let us know and we’ll accommodate your request as much as possible. The presentation will cover the following information:

  • Who is subject to the employer mandate in 2015?
  • How do you measure your variable hour employees to determine if they are required to be offered coverage to avoid penalties in 2015?
  • How do you avoid any litigation pitfalls inherent with ACA implementation?
  • What are the next steps to ensure compliance?
  • How might the latest court ruling affect me?

If you prefer to receive our written guidebook in lieu of the webinar, please contact us for a copy. If you have any questions on your current program, please contact us at your earliest convenience.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
http://www.clearyinsurance.com/wp-content/uploads/Cleary_Logo.jpg 0 0 Carol LaCombe http://www.clearyinsurance.com/wp-content/uploads/Cleary_Logo.jpg Carol LaCombe2014-07-22 18:21:332016-08-01 08:16:13ACA Breaking News

Newsletter Sign Up

Select list(s) to subscribe to

Recent Posts

  • Dirty Dozen List of Pesticide -Contaminated Produce
  • War in Iran Is Driving Costs Up -Here Are Ways to Save
  • Home Maintenance Tips for Spring
  • Spring Risk Check: 5 Things Every Business Should Inspect
  • Retirement Planning For Young Adults

Archives

  • April 2026
  • January 2026
  • October 2025
  • August 2025
  • April 2025
  • January 2025
  • October 2024
  • July 2024
  • April 2024
  • January 2024
  • October 2023
  • July 2023
  • April 2023
  • January 2023
  • November 2022
  • July 2022
  • April 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • October 2021
  • July 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • August 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • January 2020
  • September 2019
  • June 2019
  • April 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • October 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • May 2017
  • February 2017
  • October 2016
  • August 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • January 2016
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • January 2015
  • September 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • June 2013
  • March 2013
  • January 2013
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • March 2012
  • December 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011

Search

Search Search

Categories

  • Benefits
  • Commercial
  • Financial Services
  • News
  • Personal
© Copyright - Cleary Insurance
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to LinkedIn
  • Blog
  • Forms & Publications
  • Employee Directory
  • Privacy Policy
Link to: Service Contract Act (SCA) Prevailing Wage Increase Link to: Service Contract Act (SCA) Prevailing Wage Increase Service Contract Act (SCA) Prevailing Wage Increase Link to: Named Insured vs. Additional Insured Link to: Named Insured vs. Additional Insured Named Insured vs. Additional Insured
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top