What
are the consequences under Affordable Care Act if an
employer offers no health coverage?
The Affordable
Care Act, and the state health exchanges it mandates, are fraught with
confusion – particularly for employers. Business owners just want to know
what decisions they will be faced with, and how much time will they have to
figure it out before the next fiscal year.
The health care
reform law does not specifically require employers to offer health coverage
to their employees. However, beginning in 2014, an employer will be liable
for a penalty if at least one of its full-time employees obtains subsidized
coverage through an Exchange. The use of a skilled trade staffing company to
provide your project specific skilled labor needs will mitigate this penalty.
The sweeping
and unprecedented legislation is taking effect so quickly that not all the
answers are clear. Most employers are waiting for decisions at a federal
level before they can take action or answer pressing questions. The meaningful interpretation of the
Affordable Care Act will be an ongoing project for Construct Corps in 2013
and beyond.
Proposed regulations that attempt to resolve issues and
practical problems related to employer penalties under the “play or pay”
provisions of the Affordable Care Act were revealed early January by the U.S.
Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service and placed in
line for publication on Jan. 2. The proposed regulations run 144 pages long.
Under the Affordable Care Act, beginning in 2014, most
employers will be subject to penalties if they decide not to offer health
care coverage to employees and dependents. To be covered under the
penalty provisions, an employer must have averaged at least 50 full-time
equivalents during the preceding calendar year.
To determine the number of full-time equivalents, add up
the number of hours that part-time workers performed during the month and
divide that number by 120. Add the resulting number to the number of
employees who work more than 30 hours a week. This gives you the number
full-time equivalents for the employers.
|
(number of full-time employees during the month – 30) x $166.67 =
Penalty for that month
Here is an example:XYZ Electrical Contractors, Inc. has 85 employees in the month of June 2014, and the company does not provide health insurance to those workers. That month, three XYZ Electrical Contractors, Inc.’s employees are participating in the state’s health insurance exchange.
(85 – 30) x $166.67 = $9,166.85
XYZ Electrical Contractors, Inc. would pay $9,166.85 penalty
for June.
The best news for contractors with project specific staffing
needs is the much-anticipated ‘look-back’.
The ‘look-back’ system allows temporary staffing agencies to measure the
full-time status of employees over retrospective averaging periods as long as
12 months — instead of making that determination over monthly averaging
periods. If XYZ Electrical Contractors,
Inc. used temporary staffing as their primary source for project specific labor
they would capture an annual savings of nearly $110,002.20 ($9,166.85 x 12 months)
in potential penalties.
Content sourced from the Society for Human Resource Management
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.