The Internal Revenue Service needs to greatly expand the number of wellness plan incentivesthat will count towards the “affordability” standard to which corporations will be held by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
So argued the 1,500-member-strong ERISA Industry Committee in a letter this month to the IRS. The federal tax agency is responsible for overseeing corporate compliance with the affordability requirement of the PPACA.
Expanding the list wouldn't take much; it's currently a list of one.
The cost of smoking cessation programs is the only wellness plan incentive employers can count toward the 9.5 percent affordability ceiling when (and if) the act takes full effect as now scheduled in 2015.
The idea behind the incentive is to give employers whoworkers quit smoking a bonus for doing so.
The program cost is subtracted from the overall cost of coverage when the IRS crunches the numbers to see whether an employer has offered an employee coverage that is less than 9.5 percent of his or her household income.
ERIC believes there are many more incentives that should be counted so that companies are encouraged to offer more of these opportunities to improve worker health.
“ERIC urges the IRS to modify the proposed rules to provide that the value of all wellness incentives, and not just those related to tobacco use, are taken into account for purposes of determining affordability of an employer-sponsored plan and whether the plan provides minimum value,” the letter stated.
“Under the current proposal, affordability of an employer-sponsored plan and whether a plan provides minimum value are determined without taking wellness incentives into account, except those relating to tobacco use.”
In the letter, ERIC President Scott Macey and ERIC Senior Vice President for Health Policy Gretchen Young underscored the need to reward companies that go the extra mile for employee health.
“The selective recognition of wellness incentives, as proposed in these regulations, discourages the most effective and efficient use of wellness programs by those employees who would most benefit from incentives to become healthier,” they said. “Companies should not be penalized for trying to reduce the cost of health care through the effective use of wellness programs that comply with all the protections and safety valves required in the final wellness regulation.”
To date, ERIC has not received a response from the IRS, ERIC spokesman Ted Godbout said.
This article was originally posted at LifeHealthPro.com, a sister site of Credit Union Times.
Complete your profile to continue reading and get FREE access to CUTimes.com, part of your ALM digital membership.
Your access to unlimited CUTimes.com content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking credit union news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Shared Accounts podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical coverage of the commercial real estate and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, GlobeSt.com and ThinkAdvisor.com
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Dan Cook
Dan Cook is a journalist and communications consultant based in Portland, OR. During his journalism career he has been a reporter and editor for a variety of media companies, including American Lawyer Media, BusinessWeek, Newhouse Newspapers, Knight-Ridder, Time Inc., and Reuters. He specializes in health care and insurance related coverage for BenefitsPRO.
