by admin | Mar 20, 2025 | Blog
Navigating the requirements for Summary Plan Descriptions (SPDs) under ERISA health and welfare plans can be complex. Ensuring compliance is crucial for plan administrators, especially for COBRA qualified beneficiaries. This guide will help you understand who must receive SPDs and the specific considerations for COBRA compliance.
Who Must Receive SPDs?
Plan administrators must automatically furnish SPDs to all participants covered under ERISA health and welfare plans. This includes current employees, former employees who are or may become eligible for benefits, and their beneficiaries.
COBRA Qualified Beneficiaries
COBRA qualified beneficiaries are a key group that must receive SPDs. These individuals have the right to continue their health coverage under the plan after certain qualifying events, such as termination of employment or reduction in hours. Here are the specific considerations:
- Automatic Provision of SPDs: COBRA qualified beneficiaries must receive SPDs automatically.
- Single SPD for Same Address: Separate SPDs are generally not required for qualified beneficiaries living at the same address.
Other Categories of Individuals Who Must Receive SPDs
In addition to COBRA qualified beneficiaries, the following categories must also receive SPDs:
- Employees or Former Employees Covered Under the Plan: Current plan participants and former employees, such as retirees, who remain covered under the plan.
- Alternate Recipients Under QMCSOs: Typically furnished to the child’s custodial parent or guardian.
- Spouses or Dependents of Deceased Participants: Those who continue to receive benefits under the plan.
- Representatives or Guardians of Incapacitated Persons: Sent to the individual’s representative or guardian.
Triggering Events for Automatic SPDs
ERISA specifies the events that trigger the requirement to automatically furnish SPDs. Additionally, SPDs must be provided to plan participants and beneficiaries who request them.
Understanding who must receive SPDs and the specific requirements for COBRA qualified beneficiaries is essential for compliance with ERISA health and welfare plans. By following these guidelines, plan administrators can ensure they meet their obligations and provide necessary information to all eligible participants.
Source: Thomson Reuters
by admin | Sep 19, 2024 | Blog
When companies contribute to the cost of health club memberships or provide on-site fitness centers, questions often arise about whether these benefits fall under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Understanding the nuances of ERISA and how it applies to health-related benefits is crucial for employers.
What is ERISA?
ERISA is a federal law that sets standards for most voluntarily established retirement and health plans in private industry to provide protection for individuals in these plans. For a benefit program to qualify as an ERISA plan, it must provide one or more of the benefits listed in the ERISA definition, such as medical, sickness, or disability benefits.
Health Club Memberships and ERISA
Generally, paying for employees’ health club memberships does not constitute an ERISA plan. Health and fitness clubs promote general good health but are typically made available without regard to sickness or disability. They do not diagnose or treat specific medical conditions, so they usually do not provide medical care or any other ERISA benefit. Therefore, a policy or program of paying for health club memberships would not be considered an ERISA plan.
On-Site Fitness Centers and ERISA
Similarly, providing an on-site fitness center for employees does not typically make the program subject to ERISA. On-site fitness centers, like health clubs, promote general wellness but do not provide medical care or benefits in the event of sickness. Thus, they do not meet the criteria for an ERISA plan.
Exceptions: Disease-Management Programs
In rare cases, health club memberships or access to on-site fitness centers may be part of a disease-management program that includes diagnostic, therapeutic, or preventive care. These programs might offer “coaching” for specific health conditions or risks. Such arrangements could be viewed as providing a medical benefit, potentially making them subject to ERISA and applicable group health plan rules. The complexity and fact-specific nature of these programs mean that legal counsel should be consulted to determine ERISA applicability.
Tax Considerations
Whether a benefit is subject to ERISA does not affect whether it produces taxable income for participants or beneficiaries. However, an employer’s payment or reimbursement of health club dues or provision of an on-site fitness center may raise tax issues, which should also be reviewed with legal counsel.
Conclusion
While health club memberships and on-site fitness centers generally do not fall under ERISA, exceptions exist, particularly when these benefits are part of a broader health management program. Employers should carefully evaluate their programs and consult with legal counsel to ensure compliance with ERISA and tax regulations.
Source: Thomson Reuters
by Lexi Garcia | Jun 6, 2024 | Blog
Providing a Summary of Benefits and Coverage (SBC) that is culturally and linguistically appropriate is not just a good practice—it’s a legal requirement for many group health plans. Whether your plan is self-insured or fully insured, it’s essential to understand and comply with these regulations to avoid penalties and ensure your members can access and understand their benefits. In this blog post, we’ll break down what you need to know about furnishing the SBC in languages other than English.
Understanding the Requirement
The SBC must be presented in a “culturally and linguistically appropriate” manner. This requirement is part of a broader effort to ensure that individuals who are literate only in a non-English language can understand their health coverage options. The specific conditions under which this requirement is triggered are based on U.S. Census data.
When Does the Requirement Apply?
The requirement applies if your plan’s SBC is provided to individuals in any county where at least 10% of the population is literate only in the same non-English language. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regularly updates a list of such counties and the languages that apply. As of January 1, 2025, a new list will come into effect, and it’s crucial for plan administrators to stay updated with these changes.
Compliance Steps for Group Health Plans
To comply with the “culturally and linguistically appropriate” requirement, follow these steps:
- Identify Applicable Counties: Check the latest HHS list to see if any counties where your plan members reside meet the 10% threshold for non-English language literacy.
- Provide Interpretive Services: In applicable counties, offer interpretive services in the relevant languages. This includes answering questions and providing assistance in the non-English language.
- Include a One-Sentence Statement: On the SBC, include a one-sentence statement in the applicable non-English languages. This statement should clearly indicate how to access language services. It must be placed on the same page as the “Your Rights to Continue Coverage” and “Your Grievance and Appeals Rights” sections.
- Offer Written Translations: Upon request, provide a written translation of the SBC in the applicable non-English language. The agencies have provided an SBC template that includes this one-sentence statement in all required languages for plan years beginning before 2025.
- Stay Updated: Keep an eye on updates from the HHS, DOL, and IRS regarding additional translations and template updates. These resources will assist in maintaining compliance with the latest requirements.
Voluntary Compliance
Even if your plan does not operate in a county meeting the 10% threshold, you may choose to include the one-sentence statement in any non-English language. If you opt for this, ensure you are prepared to provide the necessary language services.
Differentiating SBC Requirements from ERISA
It’s important to note that the requirements for SBCs differ from ERISA’s rules on language assistance for Summary Plan Descriptions (SPDs) and Summary of Material Modifications (SMMs). Ensure you are familiar with both sets of regulations to avoid confusion and non-compliance.
Meeting the requirement for a culturally and linguistically appropriate SBC is vital for compliance and member satisfaction. By following the steps outlined above, your self-insured group health plan can ensure that all members understand their coverage options, regardless of their primary language. Stay informed, be proactive, and provide the necessary language services to comply with federal regulations and support your diverse member base.
Source: Thomson Reuters
by Lexi Garcia | Feb 29, 2024 | Blog
QUESTION: I am reviewing our company’s employee benefit programs and confirming that they are treated appropriately for ERISA compliance purposes. Our disability program provides income-replacement benefits to employees who are unable to work because of illness or injury; payments commence once an employee is out of work for more than two weeks. Benefits are paid from the company’s general assets, not from a trust or separate account. Am I right that for this reason, our program is not an ERISA plan, or do additional conditions apply?
ANSWER: You are correct that a DOL regulation exempts certain “payroll practices,” including disability payments, from ERISA-plan status. You are also correct that the main condition of this regulatory exemption (often referred to as a safe harbor) is that the payments come from the employer’s general assets. It sounds like your program meets this requirement—but several other elements also must be considered to determine whether your program falls within the exemption. If a disability program has any of the following features, the payroll practice safe harbor is not available, and the program is most likely subject to ERISA:
- Trust or Separate Account. As noted above, making payments from the employer’s general assets is a key component of the exemption, so funding the program through a trust or separate account will take it outside the safe harbor. It is, however, generally permissible to earmark funds for the program within the employer’s general assets, so long as the funds remain available for other purposes, such as to pay the employer’s creditors.
- Insurance. Payment of benefits through insurance is not payment from the employer’s general assets, so using insurance will take the program outside the safe harbor.
- Paying More Than Normal Compensation. To fall within the safe harbor, the program may pay eligible employees only their normal compensation, or less (for example, 60% of normal compensation).
- Paying Benefits to Former Employees. The safe harbor covers only payments to employees while absent from work, not to former employees—the exemption does not apply if payments continue after an individual terminates employment. You will need to consider the duration of benefits available under the program and ensure that it does not extend beyond when the company considers termination of employment to occur. For example, if an employee who does not return to work is treated as having terminated employment before exhaustion of the disability benefits available under the program, the program does not fall within the safe harbor. As a practical matter, long-term disability programs are more likely to provide benefits beyond termination of employment and thus not meet the requirements, even if paid from the employer’s general assets.
Although it is possible that an arrangement that does not fall within the regulatory exemption may still avoid ERISA’s application under the general standard (a plan, fund, or program established or maintained by an employer to provide ERISA-listed benefits to employees), such a result is unlikely. Thus, any variations from the safe harbor requirements should be discussed with legal counsel. As a final caution, if your company wishes to treat this program as not subject to ERISA, make sure that any program documents, descriptions, and employee communications are consistent with this intent. Even though an employer generally cannot make a non-ERISA arrangement subject to ERISA by simply calling it an ERISA plan, the employer’s treatment is a factor—at least one court has found that treating a potentially exempt payroll practice as an ERISA plan was a “strong reason to find ERISA coverage.” If the company uses a single “umbrella” or “wrap” document to bundle multiple benefit programs, the document should specify which programs are—and are not—intended to be subject to ERISA.
Source: Thomson Reuters
by Lexi Garcia | Feb 22, 2024 | Blog
QUESTION: We are planning to add an HDHP and to make company contributions to employees’ HSAs. We have been told that an HSA contribution program—unlike the HDHP coverage—would not be subject to ERISA. Is that always true, or are there circumstances in which ERISA might apply?
ANSWER: Employer-facilitated HSA contribution programs generally are not subject to ERISA. Even though HSA funds may be intended to provide medical care, HSAs are viewed as personal accounts that are not ERISA-covered welfare benefit plans, so long as employee participation is completely voluntary and the employer’s involvement is limited. However, there are ways in which an HSA contribution program could become subject to ERISA. Those ERISA triggers should be avoided because ERISA’s compliance obligations were not crafted with HSAs in mind, and it is not clear how and whether all of ERISA’s requirements could be satisfied by an HSA program.
The DOL has established two safe harbors from ERISA coverage that may apply to workplace HSA programs. One, the voluntary plan safe harbor for group or group-type insurance programs, does not allow employer contributions, so for your purposes, we will focus instead on the HSA-specific safe harbor, which allows employer contributions. Under that safe harbor, employer contributions will not result in ERISA’s application if all of the following requirements are met:
- Voluntary Employee Contributions. An employer using the safe harbor can unilaterally establish HSAs for employees and deposit employer funds into those accounts. But any contributions made by employees, including salary reduction contributions, must be voluntary.
- Portable Funds. An employer’s program may limit forwarding of HSA contributions to a single HSA provider without triggering ERISA. But the employer cannot limit what happens after that initial deposit; employees must be able to move funds to another HSA if they desire.
- Unrestricted Use of Funds. Some employers may wish to impose conditions on how HSA funds are used, such as a requirement that funds be used only for qualified medical expenses. Any such restrictions, however, will cause the arrangement to fall outside the safe harbor.
- No Employer Influence. When selecting an HSA provider, employers may choose trustees or custodians that offer only a limited selection of investment options or options replicating those available under the employer’s 401(k) plan. Generally, however, the employer cannot make or attempt to influence employees’ investment decisions.
- Not Represented as an ERISA Plan. This requirement seems simple, but it is also easily violated. Participant communications must not represent the HSA program as part of an ERISA plan, or as an ERISA plan of its own, and should include appropriate disclaimers indicating that the HSA is not part of an ERISA plan. From a drafting perspective, the HSA provisions should not be included in an ERISA plan document. While bundling non-ERISA and ERISA benefits will normally not make the non-ERISA benefits subject to ERISA, careful drafting and communications are required to ensure that the HSA satisfies the safe harbor.
- No Employer Compensation. The employer cannot receive any direct or indirect payment or compensation in connection with its employees’ HSAs. This rule precludes discounts on other products that the employer may purchase from the HSA vendor, and may raise questions in other situations (e.g., bundled arrangements). This prohibition does not preclude making HSA contributions through a cafeteria plan; the employment tax savings realized by the employer is not considered compensation for this purpose.
Failure to meet any one of these elements will cause the program to fall outside the safe harbor. Although a program involving employer actions or program rules not specifically authorized by the safe harbor might still avoid ERISA, any variations should be discussed in advance with counsel.
Source: Thomson Reuters
