By: Stacy Van Alstyne​

On Tuesday, July 22, two federal appeals courts issued conflicting decisions affecting the Affordable Care Acts individual mandate.

The first decision, issued by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, said that ACA does not permit the IRS to distribute premium subsidies in the federal exchange. The law refers only to state exchanges. This means that in 36 states, individuals who purchased coverage through the federal exchange would have to bear the full cost of their insurance.

Then came the next ruling . . .

7.23_Conflictin-aca-court-decisions.jpg Hours later, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, ruled​ exactly opposite, stating that the IRS has the discretion to issue subsidies in the federal exchange given the ambiguous language of the law. They argued that the intent of the law is to provide subsidies to individuals who purchase insurance through either the state or federal exchanges.

In both cases, the judges anticipated the decisions to be appealed (the Obama administration has already said it will appeal the D.C. Circuit Court decision), so the application of the rulings will not be immediate. However, the contradictory rulings could be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court and have major implications to the health care law.

Should the D.C. Circuit Courts decision be upheld, it has the potential to impact employers’ ACA requirements, especially for employers that were relying on the public exchanges to cover their employees. Without the subsidies, those on the federal exchange can expect a premium increase of up to 76%.

There is some speculation that this could be a huge game changer for some employers.  A Forb​es column issued later on Tuesday speculated that the conflicting decisions would cause “chaos” for companies in low-wage industries as they plan their 2015 health care benefit coverage.  The Forbes piece suggested companies were counting on the subsidies to soften the blow to employees being pushed into the exchanges. Also, the lack of subsidies could interfere with the enforcement of employer mandate penalties. The employer penalties are initiated when any employee signs up for health coverage at an exchange and receives a subsidy. If there are no subsidies in the states with federally run exchanges, the penalty would never be triggered.

To put this in perspective, note that the International Foundations 2014 ACA Survey showed that a large majority of employers are planning to continue providing health care coverage to employees in 2015. Less than 1%  (0.3%) of plan sponsors were definitely dropping coverage.  Another 1.1% were “very likely” to drop coverage and an additional 1.1% were “likely” to drop coverage.

Bottom line:  The story is not over. Analysts continue to debate both sides of the argument—the intent of the law versus how the law was written.

 

Stacy Van Alstyne, CEBS

Communications Director at the International Foundation 

Favorite Foundation service/product: Personalized research services. The information the specialists come up with is gold—so much better than Google searches.

Benefits related topics that get her attention: Given she works in PR, whatever is hot now. Retirement security—loves the chance to encourage people, especially those starting out, to save.

Favorite Foundation conference/event moment: Meeting the President during the DOL’s Savers Summit which the Foundation helped produce; experiencing the power of 6,000 members in one room during Annual Conference’s opening session; trying not to cry during Scott Hamilton’s talk in 2012. Felt better when I saw a Teamster next to me sniffling.

Personal Insight: What does Stacy do to unwind from the stresses of life in the PR pressure cooker? She paints cows. No, not paint on cows. Paintings of cows. As our resident “foodie,” Stacy’s lunch leftovers are a delicacy to her office mates.

 

Recommended Posts

The Growing Importance of Cross-Cultural Competence

Eli Argueta
 

In the ever-expanding global marketplace, organizations are increasingly embracing the importance of understanding and respecting diverse cultures. Nowhere is this more crucial than in the realm of global benefits, where effective communication and collaboration across cultural boundaries can make all the difference. […]

Measuring and Addressing Burnout and Stress in the Workplace

Anne Patterson
 

According to the International Foundation’s Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Benefits Survey Report, 96% of the workforce is stressed—either somewhat or very. With mostly every worker facing stress at some level, it’s important for plan sponsors/employers to know how to identify […]

Student Loan Repayment and Financial Wellness Benefits: What’s New?

Anne Newhouse
 

Student loan repayment has been more top-of-mind in recent weeks with President Biden’s announcement on February 21, 2024. The Department of Education emailed 153,000 borrowers that student loans were being discharged for those enrolled in the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) […]

Paid Family and Medical Leave Legislative Developments

Jenny Gartman, CEBS
 

Proposals for paid family and medical leave at the federal level historically haven’t had enough support to become law. Many states have added paid leave mandates since 2017, creating a challenge for multistate employers seeking to deliver consistent benefits to their entire […]