QUESTION: We are wondering if our company’s medical plan might qualify for an exemption from the federal mental health parity requirements. What exemptions are available?
ANSWER: The federal mental health parity requirements apply to most employer-sponsored group health plans, but there are a few exceptions. As a reminder, the mental health parity rules under the Mental Health Parity Act (MHPA) and the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) require parity between medical/surgical benefits and mental health or substance use disorder benefits in the application of annual and lifetime dollar limits, financial requirements (such as deductibles, copayments, coinsurance, and out-of-pocket maximums), quantitative treatment limitations (such as number of treatments, visits, or days of coverage), and nonquantitative treatment limitations (such as medical management standards). However, some exceptions apply:
Small Employer and Small Plan Exemptions. An exception is available for small employers that employed an average of at least two (one in the case of an employer residing in a state that permits small groups to include a single individual) but no more than 50 employees (100 or fewer employees for certain non-federal governmental plans) on business days during the preceding calendar year. When determining whether an employer qualifies as a small employer, certain related employers (including members of a controlled group or an affiliated service group) are treated as one employer. An employer not in existence throughout the preceding calendar year will determine whether it is a small employer based on the average number of employees that it reasonably expects to employ on business days during the current calendar year. There is also an exception for plans with fewer than two participants who were current employees on the first day of the plan year (including retiree-only plans). Note that if an employer provides coverage through a group policy purchased in the small group insurance market, that group policy will be required to cover mental health and substance use disorder services in a manner that complies with the mental health parity requirements.
Increased Cost Exemption. An increased cost exemption is available for plans that make changes to comply with the mental health parity rules and incur an increased cost of at least 2% in the first year that the MHPAEA applies to the plan (generally, the first plan year beginning on or after October 3, 2009, unless a later date applies, e.g., because the plan ceased to qualify for an exemption) or at least 1% in any subsequent plan year. Plans that comply with the parity requirements for one full plan year and satisfy the conditions for the increased cost exemption are exempt from the parity requirements for the following plan year (i.e., the exemption lasts for one plan year). After that year ends, the plan must again comply with the parity requirements for a full year before it may (potentially) qualify for the exemption again. Given the complexity of administering coverage with an every-other-year exemption, use of the increased cost exemption may be impractical.
Excepted Benefits. The federal mental health parity requirements do not apply to group health plans that provide only excepted benefits (e.g., certain limited-scope dental or vision plans and most health FSAs).
Self-insured non-federal governmental plans could previously opt out of the requirements, but the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 eliminated that right as of December 29, 2022. No new mental health parity opt-out elections may be made on or after that date and opt-out elections expiring on or after June 27, 2023, may not be renewed.
A DOL, HHS, and IRS request for information (RFI) is seeking input about how the preventive health services mandate applies to over-the-counter (OTC) preventive items and services, including the potential benefits and costs of requiring plans and insurers to cover these items at no cost without a provider’s prescription. Agency guidance has previously advised that OTC items and services generally must be covered without cost-sharing only when prescribed by a provider.
The RFI seeks information on current access to and utilization of OTC preventive products, as well as operational challenges for plans, insurers, third-party administrators, and pharmacy benefit managers. For instance, the request asks about operational challenges that may be associated with using telepharmacies and mail orders within and across states or localities. The agencies are also interested in “lessons learned” from providing coverage for OTC COVID-19 diagnostic tests during the COVID-19 public health emergency. The RFI explains that the agencies are particularly focused on OTC preventive care items that can be purchased without a prescription now or in the future, such as contraceptives, tobacco-cessation products, folic acid during pregnancy, and breastfeeding supplies.
QUESTION: Although Medicare entitlement is listed as a COBRA triggering event, our company’s COBRA TPA does not offer COBRA to covered employees when they become entitled to Medicare. Is Medicare entitlement a COBRA qualifying event for active employees who become entitled to Medicare but do not lose coverage under our group health plan?
ANSWER: Medicare entitlement is not a COBRA qualifying event for active employees who become entitled to Medicare but do not lose coverage under a group health plan. If a COBRA triggering event (such as Medicare entitlement) does not cause a loss of plan coverage, there is no qualifying event, and COBRA need not be offered. Medicare entitlement rarely causes a loss of plan coverage for active employees and, therefore, will rarely be a qualifying event. This is because the Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) rules generally prohibit group health plans from making Medicare entitlement an event that causes a loss of coverage for active employees.
The MSP statute generally prohibits a group health plan from “taking into account” the age-based or disability-based Medicare entitlement of an individual who is covered under the plan by virtue of the individual’s current employment status. In addition, the plan generally must provide a current employee who is age 65 or older with the same benefits, under the same conditions, as those provided to employees who are under age 65. Among the employer or insurer actions that constitute an impermissible “taking into account” are (1) terminating coverage because the individual has become entitled to age-based Medicare; or (2) in the case of a large group health plan, denying or terminating coverage because the individual is entitled to disability-based Medicare without also denying or terminating coverage for similarly situated individuals who are not entitled to disability-based Medicare. (Special rules apply for ESRD-based Medicare.) Consequently, Medicare entitlement will rarely be a COBRA qualifying event because it will rarely cause a loss of plan coverage for active employees.
Be aware, however, that it is permissible under the MSP rules for Medicare entitlement to cause a loss of coverage for covered retired employees. In such a case, Medicare entitlement would constitute a qualifying event for the affected spouse and dependent children (not for the covered retiree), permitting them to elect up to 36 months of COBRA under the plan.
QUESTION: Our company’s major medical plan offers a choice of self-only or family coverage. Dependent coverage is provided under the family coverage option for participants’ children who have not yet reached age 26. May our plan impose an additional premium surcharge for children who are older than age 18?
ANSWER: A premium surcharge for coverage of children over age 18 is not permitted because your plan would be impermissibly varying the terms for dependent coverage of children based on age. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires group health plans that provide dependent coverage of children to make such coverage available for a child until age 26. In addition, the terms and conditions under which dependent coverage is provided for children cannot vary based on age, except for children who are age 26 or older. This rule is known as the “uniformity requirement.”
Although your plan may not impose a surcharge for these children, revising or repricing the plan’s coverage tiers without making the structure age-based may allow your company to accomplish the same financial goals. For example, a plan design in which the cost of coverage increases for tiers with more covered individuals would not violate the ACA’s age 26 mandate, so long as the increase applies without regard to the age of any child. Although you did not specify whether your plan is grandfathered, it is important to note that changing coverage tiers can adversely affect a plan’s status as a grandfathered plan.
LEAWOOD, Kansas – NueSynergy, Inc., one of the nation’s fastest growing employee benefits and billing administrators in the country, is pleased to announce its preferred partnership with INSURICA, one of the largest privately-held independent agencies in the United States.
“NueSynergy continues to drive the consumer-directed health care industry forward with an employer-centric focus. As INSURICA looks to its future, it’s important for us to work with a preferred partner who shares our values and commitment to our existing and prospective clients,” said Ann Moses, Vice President and Branch Leader of INSURICA.
NueSynergy continues to achieve exceptional business results with innovative products like its COBRAcare+ administration. With COBRAcare+, NueSynergy works with INSURICA to take the extra step to check available health coverage and compare it to the employer’s COBRA benefits and premium cost. If the COBRA-eligible individual selects a coverage option other than COBRA, one of INSURICA’s licensed agents will help get them set up – and the employer no longer has an obligation to fulfill. It’s a true win-win for the individual and the employer.
“NueSynergy has concentrated on expanding our overall infrastructure as we continue to expand our nationwide presence,” said Josh Collins, president of NueSynergy. “As we continue to focus on proactive benefits solutions for employer clients, we look to trusted partners like INSURICA to build new client relationships.”
About NueSynergy
NueSynergy is known for industry-leading service, innovative technology, and excellence in providing full-service administration of consumer-driven and traditional account-based plans to employers of all sizes and sectors. Headquartered in Leawood, Kansas, NueSynergy also has locations in Arizona, Florida, Idaho, North Carolina, Virginia, Washington, and Rzeszów, Poland.
NueSynergy offers a fully integrated suite of administration services, which include Health Savings Account (HSA), Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA), Flexible Spending Account (FSA), Lifestyle Savings Account (LSA), and COBRAcare+ administration as well as SpouseSaver Incentive Account, Combined Billing, Direct Billing, and Specialty Solutions. For more information, visit www.NueSynergy.com.
About INSURICA
Placing over $1 billion in annual premiums for their clients, INSURICA is among the 50 largest insurance brokers in the United States and is currently the 42nd largest privately-held independent agency in the country.
Headquartered in Oklahoma City, INSURICA employs more than 700 colleagues in 35+ offices located throughout Oklahoma, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Mississippi, and Texas. INSURICA is constantly looking to expand their network with partners who bring additional value and expertise to the enterprise and our clients. For more information, visit www.INSURICA.com.
