ComplianceTwo Supreme Court decisions in 2008 Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Glenn, 128 S.Ct. 2343 and LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Assocs., Inc., 128 S.Ct. 1020) were intended to provide final answers to questions that had vexed benefits professionals for years. Unfortunately, to one degree or another, the decisions raised as many questions as they answered and have actually spawned new litigation.
Next years dollar limits that apply to employer-provided transportation plans will stay the same as this years, the IRS has decided.
The IRS has issued a proposed rule to allow employers sponsoring safe harbor non-elective plans to suspend such contributions at the beginning of a plan year if a substantial business hardship occurs and if other conditions are satisfied. Safe harbor plans include:
A cornerstone of the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Act is its fair share contribution requirement, under which employers with 11 or more full-time equivalent employees at Massachusetts locations must either make a fair and reasonable premium contribution to a group health plan, or pay to the Commonwealth an annual fair share employer contribution not to exceed $295 per full-time equivalent.
Recently enacted legislation appears to be the beginning of a trend in which the federal government is using the existing system of employer-provided health care to provide additional benefits to the uninsured and the under-insured.
The Internal Revenue Code generally requires that plan participants begin to receive required minimum distributions no later than the April 1 following the later of their reaching age 70 1/2 or retiring.
The Labor Department announced on Friday a second extension for public comment on final regulations that would permit 401(k) and other retirement plan fiduciaries to provide more advice to plan participants under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The new deadline is Nov. 18, 2009.
The Labor Department recently launched a new Web page for its application to request officials to review denials of the COBRA premium subsidy under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Leading U.S. life insurers received preliminary approval for up to $22 billion in government bailout loans that the U.S. Treasury Department is said to have earmarked for this sector.
The Supreme Court ruled May 18 that women who took maternity leave before the enactment of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 dont have a legal claim in requiring employers to apply that leave on pension accruals.
From a historical perspective, employer health plans and private health insurers have provided more limited coverage for mental illnesses and substance abuse (if any) as compared to other medical conditions.
Plan sponsors, multiemployer plans, insurance carriers and their advisors are scrambling to implement the new COBRA subsidy, which was only recently signed into law, but requires action by April 18.
Plan sponsors and administrators must prepare their group health plans to comply with new restrictions on their collection, use and disclosure of genetic information applicable to group health plans under Title I of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008.
Group health plans and their sponsors routinely rely on business associates with whom they want to be able to share protected health information, as defined by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
While employers are actively reviewing the nature of employee terminations for COBRA, they should also be carefully considering the number of participants who may have been terminated from qualified retirement plans, and whether or not a partial termination has occurred.