Podcast Center
Video Center
Webcasts
Resource Center
Events
July 17, 2012 at 09:44 AM
Provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA) that have attracted little attention up till now could give health insurers and employers incentives to reduce the number of products and plan options they offer.
Other provisions could give employers new incentives to prefer part-time employees over full-time employees, and seasonal employees over year-round employees.
Health policy watchers have included those thoughts in Web seminars presented in response to the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding a PPACA provision that could prod many individuals to own a minimum level of health coverage starting in 2014.
Kim Buckey, a principal at HighRoads Inc., Woburn, Mass., talked about the effects of a relatively popular PPACA provision — a new summary of benefits and coverage (SBC) program — during a recent webinar organized by her company.
Anne Phelps, a principal in the Washington office of Ernst & Young L.L.P., and Catherine Creech, a principal in the accounting firm’s national compensation and benefits practice, discussed the definition of “full-time equivalent” (FTE) employee today during a separate PPACA webinar organized by Ernst & Young.
PPACA opponents are still fighting implementation of PPACA in the courts, in Congress, and at federal and state regulatory agencies.
The Supreme Court ruled only that Congress has the authority under the U.S. Constitution to impose a tax on taxpayers who fail to meet PPACA health insurance ownership requirements, and that Congress can use the flow of new federal funding to encourage states to expand Medicaid eligibility. The court has not yet ruled on other constitutional questions that could affect PPACA implementation, such as whether the individual coverage mandate provision or other PPACA provisions affect U.S. residents’ right to privacy.
If PPACA takes effect on schedule and works as drafters expect, it will impose a tax on many individuals who fail to own a minimum level of health coverage by 2014, and it will impose a “shared responsibility” penalty on employers with the equivalent of more than 50 FTE employees who fail to offer health benefits.
The law also includes many other provisions, including a provision that will require health insurers and employers to provide standardized, 4-page SBCs. The SBCs are supposed to help individuals and employers make apples-to-apples comparisons when they’re shopping for coverage.
The SBC would include a summary of basic plan features, along with coverage examples that show how a specific enrollee’s plan would work if the enrollee had a baby, were managing Type II diabetes, or were dealing with other common illnesses, chronic conditions or life events. Consumers would get SBCs when they apply for coverage or enroll in group plans. Consumers also could get SBCs upon request.
The SBC requirements are set to take effect Sept. 23 for individual coverage and for group plan open enrollment periods that begin on or after Sept. 23, according to the final rule.
SEPT. 23, 2012
Federal regulators could postpone the SBC compliance deadline, but Buckey pointed out during the HighRoads webinar that for now, at least, the SBC deadline is just a little more than 2 months away.
Buckey said one of the easiest ways to streamline the SBC creation and distribution process is to streamline health plans.
“Spend some time on the front end looking at your designs,” Buckey said. “You may be able to identify opportunities to reduce your number of SBCs.”
For employer SBC issuers, easy ways to reduce the number of SBCs required could include “consolidating carriers” and putting retirees in a separate retiree health plan that is not subject to the SBC requirements, Buckey said.
