Minimum Value of Eligible Employer-Sponsored Plans and Other Rules Regarding the Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit, 25909-25916 [2013-10463]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex N), 600
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20580. If possible, submit your
paper comment to the Commission by
courier or overnight service.
Visit the Commission Web site at
https://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice
and the news release describing it. The
FTC Act and other laws that the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. The Commission will
consider all timely and responsive
public comments that it receives on or
before July 15, 2013. You can find more
information, including routine uses
permitted by the Privacy Act, in the
Commission’s privacy policy, at https://
www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.
Upon completion of the comment
period, the staff will make final
recommendations to the Commission
about the Rule. If the Commission
adopts the proposed revised Rule as
recommended by the staff, or
alternatively determines to make
changes to the proposed revised Rule, it
will publish in a future Federal Register
notice the final text of the Rule,
statement of Basis and Purpose on the
Rule, and an announcement of when the
revised Rule will become effective.
II. Communications to Commissioners
and Commissioner Advisors by Outside
Parties
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Pursuant to Commission Rule
1.18(c)(1), the Commission has
determined that communications with
respect to the merits of this proceeding
from any outside party to any
Commissioner or Commissioner advisor
shall be subject to the following
treatment. Written communications and
summaries or transcripts of oral
communications shall be placed on the
rulemaking record if the communication
is received before the end of the
comment period on the Staff Report.
They shall be placed on the public
record if the communication is received
later. Unless the outside party making
an oral communication is a member of
Congress, such communications are
permitted only if advance notice is
published in the Weekly Calendar and
Notice of ‘‘Sunshine’’ Meetings.6
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–10405 Filed 5–2–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
6 See 15 U.S.C. 57a(i)(2)(A), 45 FR 50814 (1980),
45 FR 78626 (1980).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–125398–12]
RIN 1545–BL43
Minimum Value of Eligible EmployerSponsored Plans and Other Rules
Regarding the Health Insurance
Premium Tax Credit
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document contains
proposed regulations relating to the
health insurance premium tax credit
enacted by the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act and the Health Care
and Education Reconciliation Act of
2010, as amended by the Medicare and
Medicaid Extenders Act of 2010, the
Comprehensive 1099 Taxpayer
Protection and Repayment of Exchange
Subsidy Overpayments Act of 2011, and
the Department of Defense and FullYear Continuing Appropriations Act,
2011. These proposed regulations affect
individuals who enroll in qualified
health plans through Affordable
Insurance Exchanges (Exchanges) and
claim the premium tax credit, and
Exchanges that make qualified health
plans available to individuals and
employers. These proposed regulations
also provide guidance on determining
whether health coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan
provides minimum value and affect
employers that offer health coverage and
their employees.
DATES: Written (including electronic)
comments and requests for a public
hearing must be received by July 2,
2013.
Send submissions to:
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–125398–12), Room
5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box
7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington,
DC 20044. Submissions may be handdelivered Monday through Friday
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.
to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–125398–12),
Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC, or sent electronically
via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–125398–
12).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the proposed regulations,
Andrew S. Braden, (202) 622–4960;
concerning the submission of comments
and/or requests for a public hearing,
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25909
Oluwafunmilayo Taylor, (202) 622–7180
(not toll-free calls).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Beginning in 2014, under the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act,
Public Law 111–148 (124 Stat. 119
(2010)), and the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010,
Public Law 111–152 (124 Stat. 1029
(2010)) (collectively, the Affordable Care
Act), eligible individuals who purchase
coverage under a qualified health plan
through an Affordable Insurance
Exchange may receive a premium tax
credit under section 36B of the Internal
Revenue Code (Code). Section 36B was
subsequently amended by the Medicare
and Medicaid Extenders Act of 2010,
Public Law 111–309 (124 Stat. 3285
(2010)); the Comprehensive 1099
Taxpayer Protection and Repayment of
Exchange Subsidy Overpayments Act of
2011, Public Law 112–9 (125 Stat. 36
(2011)); and the Department of Defense
and Full-Year Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2011, Public Law
112–10 (125 Stat. 38 (2011)).
Notice 2012–31 (2012–20 IRB 910)
requested comments on methods for
determining whether health coverage
under an eligible employer-sponsored
plan provides minimum value (MV).
Final regulations under section 36B (TD
9590) were published on May 23, 2012
(77 FR 30377). The final regulations
requested comments on issues to be
addressed in further guidance. The
comments have been considered in
developing these proposed regulations.
Minimum Value
Individuals generally may not receive
a premium tax credit if they are eligible
for affordable coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that provides
MV. An applicable large employer (as
defined in section 4980H(c)(2)) may be
liable for an assessable payment under
section 4980H if a full-time employee
receives a premium tax credit.
Under section 36B(c)(2)(C)(ii), a plan
fails to provide MV if the plan’s share
of the total allowed costs of benefits
provided under the plan is less than 60
percent of the costs. Section
1302(d)(2)(C) of the Affordable Care Act
provides that, in determining the
percentage of the total allowed costs of
benefits provided under a group health
plan, the regulations promulgated by the
Secretary of Health and Human Services
(HHS) under section 1302(d)(2) apply.
HHS published final regulations
under section 1302(d)(2) on February
25, 2013 (78 FR 12834). The HHS
regulations at 45 CFR 156.20 define the
percentage of the total allowed costs of
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
25910
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
benefits provided under a group health
plan as (1) The anticipated covered
medical spending for essential health
benefits (EHB) coverage (as defined in
45 CFR 156.110(a)) paid by a health
plan for a standard population, (2)
computed in accordance with the plan’s
cost-sharing, and (3) divided by the total
anticipated allowed charges for EHB
coverage provided to a standard
population. In addition, 45 CFR
156.145(c) provides that the standard
population used to compute this
percentage for MV (as developed by
HHS for this purpose) reflects the
population covered by typical selfinsured group health plans.
The HHS regulations describe several
options for determining MV. Under 45
CFR 156.145(a)(1), plans may use the
MV Calculator (available at https://
cciio.cms.gov/resources/regulations/
index.html). Alternatively, 45 CFR
156.145(a)(2) provides that a plan may
determine MV through a safe harbor
established by HHS and IRS. For plans
with nonstandard features that are
incompatible with the MV Calculator or
a safe harbor, 45 CFR 156.145(a)(3)
provides that the plan may determine
MV through an actuarial certification
from a member of the American
Academy of Actuaries after performing
an analysis in accordance with generally
accepted actuarial principles and
methodologies. Finally, 45 CFR
156.145(a)(4) provides that a plan in the
small group market satisfies MV if it
meets the requirements for any of the
levels of metal coverage defined at 45
CFR 156.140(b) (bronze, silver, gold, or
platinum).
Miscellaneous Provisions Under Section
36B
To be eligible for a premium tax
credit, an individual must be an
applicable taxpayer. Under section
36B(c)(1), an applicable taxpayer is a
taxpayer whose household income for
the taxable year is between 100 percent
and 400 percent of the federal poverty
line (FPL) for the taxpayer’s family size.
Section 36B(b)(1) provides that the
premium assistance credit amount is the
sum of the premium assistance amounts
for all coverage months in the taxable
year for individuals in the taxpayer’s
family. The premium assistance amount
for a coverage month is the lesser of (1)
the premiums for the month for one or
more qualified health plans that cover a
taxpayer or family member, or (2) the
excess of the adjusted monthly premium
for the second lowest cost silver plan (as
described in section 1302(d)(1)(B) of the
Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C.
18022(d)(1)(B)) (the benchmark plan)
that applies to the taxpayer over 1/12 of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
the product of the taxpayer’s household
income and the applicable percentage
for the taxable year. The adjusted
monthly premium, in general, is the
premium an insurer would charge for
the plan adjusted only for the ages of the
covered individuals.
Under section 36B(c)(2)(A), a coverage
month is any month for which the
taxpayer or a family member is covered
by a qualified health plan enrolled in
through an Exchange and the premium
is paid by the taxpayer or through an
advance credit payment. Section
36B(c)(2) provides that a month is not
a coverage month for an individual who
is eligible for other minimum essential
coverage. If the other coverage is eligible
employer-sponsored coverage, however,
it is treated as minimum essential
coverage only if it is affordable and
provides MV. Eligible employersponsored coverage is affordable for an
employee and related individuals if the
portion of the annual premium the
employee must pay for self-only
coverage does not exceed the required
contribution percentage (9.5 percent for
taxable years beginning before January
1, 2015) of the taxpayer’s household
income. The MV requirement is
discussed in the Explanation of
Provisions.
Any arrangement under which
employees are required, as a condition
of employment or otherwise, to be
enrolled in an employer-sponsored plan
that does not provide minimum value or
is unaffordable, and that does not give
the employees an effective opportunity
to terminate or decline the coverage,
raises a variety of issues. Proposed
regulations under section 4980H
indicate that if an employer maintains
such an arrangement it would not be
treated as having made an offer of
coverage. As a result, an applicable large
employer could be subject to an
assessable payment under that section.
See Proposed § 54.4980H–4(b), 78 FR
250 (January 2, 2013). Such an
arrangement would also raise additional
concerns. For example, it is
questionable whether the law permits
interference with an individual’s ability
to apply for a section 36B premium tax
credit by seeking to involuntarily
impose coverage that does not provide
minimum value. (See, for example, the
Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended
by section 1558 of the Affordable Care
Act, 29 U.S.C. 218c(a).) If an employer
sought to involuntarily impose on its
employees coverage that did not provide
minimum value or was unaffordable,
the IRS and Treasury, as well as other
relevant departments, may treat such
arrangements as impermissible
interference with an employee’s ability
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to access premium tax credits, as
contemplated by the Affordable Care
Act.
Explanation of Provisions and
Summary of Comments
1. Minimum Value
a. In General
The proposed regulations refer to the
proportion of the total allowed costs of
benefits provided to an employee that
are paid by the plan as the plan’s MV
percentage. The MV percentage is
determined by dividing the cost of
certain benefits (described in paragraph
b.) the plan would pay for a standard
population by the total cost of certain
benefits for the standard population,
including amounts the plan pays and
amounts the employee pays through
cost-sharing, and then converting the
result to a percentage.
b. Health Benefits Measured in
Determining MV
Commentators sought clarification of
the health benefits considered in
determining the share of benefit costs
paid by a plan. Some commentators
maintained that MV should be based on
the plan’s share of the cost of coverage
for all EHBs, including those a plan
does not offer. Other commentators
suggested that the MV percentage
should be based on the plan’s share of
the costs of only those categories of
EHBs the plan covers.
The proposed regulations do not
require employer-sponsored self-insured
and insured large group plans to cover
every EHB category or conform their
plans to an EHB benchmark that applies
to qualified health plans. The preamble
to the HHS regulations (see 78 FR
12833) notes that employer-sponsored
group health plans are not required to
offer EHBs unless they are health plans
offered in the small group market
subject to section 2707(a) of the Public
Health Service Act. The preamble also
states that, under section 1302(d)(2) of
the Affordable Care Act, MV is
measured based on the provision of
EHBs to a standard population and
plans may account for any benefits
covered by the employer that also are
covered in any one of the EHBbenchmark plans. See 45 CFR
156.145(b)(2).
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.145(a)-(c)
and the assumptions described in
Notice 2012–31, these proposed
regulations provide that MV is based on
the anticipated spending for a standard
population. The plan’s anticipated
spending for benefits provided under
any particular EHB-benchmark plan for
any State counts towards MV.
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
c. Health reimbursement arrangements,
health savings accounts, and wellness
program incentives
i. Arrangements That Reduce CostSharing
Some commentators suggested that
current year health savings account
(HSA) contributions and amounts newly
made available under a health
reimbursement arrangement (HRA)
should be fully counted toward the
plan’s share of costs included in
calculating MV. Some commentators
suggested that only HRA contributions
that may be used to pay for cost sharing
and not HRAs restricted to other uses
should be counted in the MV
calculation.
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.135(c),
the proposed regulations provide that
all amounts contributed by an employer
for the current plan year to an HSA are
taken into account in determining the
plan’s share of costs for purposes of MV
and are treated as amounts available for
first dollar coverage. Amounts newly
made available under an HRA that is
integrated with an eligible employersponsored plan for the current plan year
count for purposes of MV in the same
manner if the amounts may be used
only for cost-sharing and may not be
used to pay insurance premiums. It is
anticipated that regulations will provide
that whether an HRA is integrated with
an eligible employer-sponsored plan is
determined under rules that apply for
purposes of section 2711 of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-11).
Commentators offered differing
opinions about how nondiscriminatory
wellness program incentives that may
affect an employee’s cost sharing should
be taken into account for purposes of
the MV calculation. Some commentators
noted that the rules governing wellness
incentives require that they be available
to all similarly situated individuals.
These commentators suggested that
because eligible individuals have the
opportunity to reduce their cost-sharing
if they choose, a plan’s share of costs
should be based on the costs paid by
individuals who satisfy the terms of the
wellness program. Other commentators
expressed concern that, despite the
safeguards of the regulations governing
wellness incentives, certain individuals
inevitably will face barriers to
participation and fail to qualify for
rewards. These commentators suggested
that a plan’s share of costs should be
determined without assuming that
individuals would qualify for the
reduced cost-sharing available under a
wellness program.
The proposed regulations provide that
a plan’s share of costs for MV purposes
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
is determined without regard to reduced
cost-sharing available under a
nondiscriminatory wellness program.
However, for nondiscriminatory
wellness programs designed to prevent
or reduce tobacco use, MV may be
calculated assuming that every eligible
individual satisfies the terms of the
program relating to prevention or
reduction of tobacco use. This exception
is consistent with other Affordable Care
Act provisions (such as the ability to
charge higher premiums based on
tobacco use) reflecting a policy about
individual responsibility regarding
tobacco use.
ii. Arrangements That Reduce Premiums
Section 36B(c)(2)(C)(i)(II) and the final
regulations provide that eligible
employer-sponsored coverage is
affordable only if an employee’s
required contribution for self-only
coverage does not exceed 9.5 percent of
household income. The preamble to the
final regulations indicated that rules for
determining how HRAs and wellness
program incentives are counted in
determining the affordability of eligible
employer-sponsored coverage would be
provided in later guidance.
Some commentators asserted that an
employer’s entire annual contribution to
an HRA plus prior year contributions
should be taken into account in
determining affordability. The proposed
regulations provide that amounts newly
made available under an HRA that is
integrated with an eligible employersponsored plan for the current plan year
are taken into account only in
determining affordability if the
employee may use the amounts only for
premiums or may choose to use the
amounts for either premiums or costsharing. Treating amounts that may be
used either for premiums or cost-sharing
only towards affordability prevents
double counting the HRA amounts
when assessing MV and affordability of
eligible employer-sponsored coverage.
It is anticipated that regulations under
section 5000A will provide that
amounts newly made available under an
HRA that is integrated with an eligible
employer-sponsored plan for the current
plan year are also taken into account for
purposes of the affordability exemption
under section 5000A(e)(1) if the
employee may use the amounts only for
premiums or for either premiums or
cost-sharing.
The final regulations requested
specific comments on the nature of
wellness incentives and how they
should be treated for determining
affordability. Commentators expressed
similar views about the treatment of
wellness incentives that affect the cost
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25911
of premiums as about the treatment of
wellness incentives that affect costsharing.
Like the rule for determining MV, the
proposed regulations provide that the
affordability of an employer-sponsored
plan is determined by assuming that
each employee fails to satisfy the
requirements of a wellness program,
except the requirements of a
nondiscriminatory wellness program
related to tobacco use. Thus, the
affordability of a plan that charges a
higher initial premium for tobacco users
will be determined based on the
premium that is charged to non-tobacco
users, or tobacco users who complete
the related wellness program, such as
attending smoking cessation classes.
In many circumstances these rules
relating to the effect of premium-related
wellness program rewards on
affordability will have no practical
consequences. They matter only when
the employer sets the level of the
employee’s required contribution to
self-only premium, and establishes a
wellness program that provides for a
level of premium discount, in such a
manner that the employee’s required
contribution to premium would exceed
9.5 percent of household income (or
wages, under an affordability safe
harbor under the section 4980H
proposed regulations) but for the
potential premium discount under the
wellness program. If, for example, the
employee’s household income was at
least $25,000, and the employee’s
required contribution for self-only
coverage did not exceed $2,375 (9.5
percent of $25,000), the coverage would
be affordable whether or not a wellness
premium discount was taken into
account to reduce the $2,375 required
contribution.
It is anticipated that regulations under
section 5000A will provide that
nondiscriminatory wellness programs
that affect premiums will be treated for
purposes of the affordability exemption
under section 5000A(e)(1) in the same
manner as they are treated for purposes
of determining affordability under
section 36B.
Solely for purposes of applying
section 4980H and solely for plan years
of an employer’s group health plan
beginning before January 1, 2015, with
respect to an employee described in the
next sentence, an employer will not be
subject to an assessable payment under
section 4980H(b) with respect to an
employee who received a premium tax
credit because the offer of coverage was
not affordable or did not satisfy MV, if
the offer of coverage to the employee
under the employer’s group health plan
would have been affordable or would
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
25912
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
have satisfied MV based on the total
required employee premium and costsharing for that group health plan that
would have applied to the employee if
the employee satisfied the requirements
of any wellness program described in
the next sentence, including a wellness
program with requirements unrelated to
tobacco use. The rule in the preceding
sentence applies only (1) To the extent
of the reward as of May 3, 2013,
expressed as either a dollar amount or
a fraction of the total required employee
contribution to the premium (or the
employee cost-sharing, as applicable),
(2) under the terms of a wellness
program as in effect on May 3, 2013, and
(3) with respect to an employee who is
in a category of employees eligible
under the terms of the wellness program
as in effect on May 3, 2013 (regardless
of whether the employee was hired
before or after that date). Any required
employee contribution to premium
determined based upon assumed
satisfaction of the requirements of a
wellness program available under this
transition relief may be applied to the
use of an affordability safe harbor
provided in the proposed regulations
under section 4980H.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
d. Standard Population and Utilization
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.145(c),
the proposed regulations provide that
the standard population used to
determine MV reflects the population
covered by self-insured group health
plans. HHS has developed the MV
standard population and described it
through summary statistics (for
example, continuance tables). MV
continuance tables and an explanation
of the MV Calculator methodology and
the health claims data HHS has used to
develop the continuance tables are
available at https://cciio.cms.gov/
resources/regulations/.
e. Methods for Determining Minimum
Value
Notice 2012–31 and 45 CFR
156.145(a) describe several methods for
determining MV: the MV Calculator, a
safe harbor, actuarial certification, and,
for small group market plans, a metal
level. Some commentators requested
that plans be allowed to choose one of
the four methods in determining MV.
Other commentators favored requiring
employers to use the most precise
method for plans that may be close to
the 60 percent threshold.
The proposed regulations provide that
taxpayers may determine whether a
plan provides MV by using the MV
Calculator made available by HHS and
the IRS. Taxpayers must use the MV
Calculator to measure standard plan
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
features (unless a safe harbor applies),
but the percentage may be adjusted
based on an actuarial analysis of plan
features that are outside the parameters
of the calculator.
Certain safe harbor plan designs that
satisfy MV will be specified in
additional guidance under section 36B
or 4980H, see § 601.601(d). It is
anticipated that the guidance will
provide that the safe harbors are
examples of plan designs that clearly
would satisfy the 60 percent threshold
if measured using the MV Calculator.
The safe harbors are intended to provide
an easy way for sponsors of typical
employer-sponsored group health plans
to determine whether a plan meets the
MV threshold without having to use the
MV Calculator.
Plan designs meeting the following
specifications are proposed as safe
harbors for determining MV if the plans
cover all of the benefits included in the
MV Calculator: (1) A plan with a $3,500
integrated medical and drug deductible,
80 percent plan cost-sharing, and a
$6,000 maximum out-of-pocket limit for
employee cost-sharing; (2) a plan with a
$4,500 integrated medical and drug
deductible, 70 percent plan costsharing, a $6,400 maximum out-ofpocket limit, and a $500 employer
contribution to an HSA; and (3) a plan
with a $3,500 medical deductible, $0
drug deductible, 60 percent plan
medical expense cost-sharing, 75
percent plan drug cost-sharing, a $6,400
maximum out-of-pocket limit, and drug
co-pays of $10/$20/$50 for the first,
second and third prescription drug tiers,
with 75 percent coinsurance for
specialty drugs. Comments are
requested on these and other common
plan designs that would satisfy MV and
should be designated as safe harbors.
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.145(a),
the proposed regulations require plans
with nonstandard features that cannot
determine MV using the MV Calculator
or a safe harbor to use the actuarial
certification method. The actuary must
be a member of the American Academy
of Actuaries and must perform the
analysis in accordance with generally
accepted actuarial principles and
methodologies and any additional
standards that subsequent guidance
requires.
f. Other Issues
Commentators suggested a de minimis
exception to the MV 60 percent level of
coverage, noting that similar de minimis
variations are permitted in determining
actuarial value for qualified health
plans. However, as other commentators
noted, permitting a de minimis
exception would have the effect of
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
lowering the minimum level of coverage
to a percentage below 60 percent. Under
section 36B(c)(2)(C)(ii), coverage below
60 percent does not provide MV.
Accordingly, the proposed regulations
do not provide for a de minimis
exception.
2. Miscellaneous Issues Under Section
36B
a. Definition of Modified Adjusted Gross
Income
Section 36B(d)(2) provides that the
term household income means the
modified adjusted gross income of the
taxpayer plus the modified adjusted
gross income of all members of the
taxpayer’s family required to file a tax
return under section 1 for the taxable
year. The final regulations provide that
the determination of whether a family
member is required to file a return is
made without regard to section 1(g)(7).
Under section 1(g)(7), a parent may, if
certain requirements are met, elect to
include in the parent’s gross income, the
gross income of his or her child. If the
parent makes the election, the child is
treated as having no gross income for
the taxable year.
The proposed regulations remove
‘‘without regard to section 1(g)(7)’’ from
the final regulations because that
language implies that the child’s gross
income is included in both the parent’s
adjusted gross income and the child’s
adjusted gross income in determining
household income. Thus, the proposed
regulations clarify that if a parent makes
an election under section 1(g)(7),
household income includes the child’s
gross income included on the parent’s
return and the child is treated as having
no gross income.
b. Rating Area
Section 36B(b)(3)(B) determines the
applicable benchmark plan by reference
to the rating area where a taxpayer
resides. The final regulations reserved
the definition of rating area. The
proposed regulations provide that the
term rating area has the same meaning
as used in section 2701(a)(2) of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300gg) and 45 CFR 156.255.
c. Retiree Coverage
The section 36B final regulations
provide that an individual who may
enroll in continuation coverage required
under Federal law or a State law that
provides comparable continuation
coverage is eligible for minimum
essential coverage only for months that
the individual is enrolled in the
coverage. These proposed regulations
apply this rule to former employees
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
only. Active employees eligible for
continuation coverage as a result of
reduced hours should be subject to the
same rules for eligibility of affordable
employer-sponsored coverage offering
MV as other active employees. The
proposed regulations add a comparable
rule for health coverage offered to
retired employees (retiree coverage).
Accordingly, an individual who may
enroll in retiree coverage is eligible for
minimum essential coverage under the
coverage only for the months the
individual is enrolled in the coverage.
d Coverage Month for Newborns and
New Adoptees
Under section 36B(c)(2)(A)(i) and the
final regulations, a month is a coverage
month for an individual only if, as of
the first day of the month, the
individual is enrolled in a qualified
health plan through an Exchange. A
child born or adopted during the month
is not enrolled in coverage on the first
day and therefore would not be eligible
for the premium tax credit or costsharing reductions for that month.
Accordingly, the proposed regulations
provide that a child enrolled in a
qualified health plan in the month of
the child’s birth, adoption, or placement
with the taxpayer for adoption or in
foster care, is treated as enrolled as of
the first day of the month.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
e. Adjusted Monthly Premium for
Family Members Enrolled for Less Than
a Full Month
Under section 36B(c), the premium
assistance amount for a coverage month
is computed by reference to the adjusted
monthly premium for an applicable
benchmark plan. The final regulations
provide that the applicable benchmark
plan is the plan that applies to a
taxpayer’s coverage family. The final
regulations do not address whether
changes to a coverage family, for
example as the result of the birth and
enrollment of a child or the
disenrollment of another family
member, that occur during the month
affect the premium assistance amount.
The proposed regulations provide that
the adjusted monthly premium is
determined as if all members of the
coverage family for that month were
enrolled in a qualified health plan for
the entire month.
f. Premium Assistance Amount for
Partial Months of Coverage
The final regulations do not address
the computation of the premium
assistance amount if coverage under a
qualified health plan is terminated
during the month. The proposed
regulations provide that when coverage
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
under a qualified health plan is
terminated before the last day of a
month and, as a result, the issuer
reduces or refunds a portion of the
monthly premium the premium
assistance amount for the month is
prorated based on the number of days of
coverage in the month.
g. Family Members Residing at Different
Locations
The final regulations reserved rules
on determining the premium for the
applicable benchmark plan if family
members are geographically separated
and enroll in separate qualified health
plans. The proposed regulations provide
that the premium for the applicable
benchmark plan in this situation is the
sum of the premiums for the applicable
benchmark plans for each group of
family members residing in a different
State.
h. Correction to Applicable Percentage
Table
The applicable percentage table in the
final regulations erroneously states that
the 9.5 percentage applies only to
taxpayers whose household income is
less than 400 percent of the FPL. The
proposed regulations clarify that the 9.5
percentage applies to taxpayers whose
household income is not more than 400
percent of the FPL.
i. Additional Benefits and Applicable
Benchmark Plan
Under section 36B(b)(3)(D) and the
final regulations, only the portion of the
premium for a qualified health plan
properly allocable to EHBs determines a
taxpayer’s premium assistance amount.
Premiums allocable to benefits other
than EHBs (additional benefits) are
disregarded. The final regulations do
not address, however, whether a
taxpayer’s benchmark plan is
determined before or after premiums
have been allocated to additional
benefits. The proposed regulations
provide that premiums are allocated to
additional benefits before determining
the applicable benchmark plan. Thus,
only essential health benefits are
considered in determining the
applicable benchmark plan, consistent
with the requirement in section
36B(b)(3)(D) that only essential health
benefits are considered in determining
the premium assistance amount. In
addition, allocating premium to benefits
that exceed EHBs before determining
the applicable benchmark plan results
in a more accurate determination of the
premium assistance amount.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25913
j. Requirement To File a Return To
Reconcile Advance Credit Payments
The final regulations provided that a
taxpayer who receives advance credit
payments must file an income tax return
for that taxable year on or before the
fifteenth day of the fourth month
following the close of the taxable year.
Under the proposed regulations, a
taxpayer who receives advance credit
payments must file an income tax return
on or before the due date for the return
(including extensions).
Effective/Applicability Date
These regulations are proposed to
apply for taxable years ending after
December 31, 2013. Taxpayers may
apply the proposed regulations for
taxable years ending before January 1,
2015.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice
of proposed rulemaking is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866, as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563. Therefore, a regulatory
assessment is not required. It has also
been determined that section 553(b) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these
regulations and, because the regulations
do not impose a collection of
information on small entities, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to
section 7805(f) of the Code, this notice
of proposed rulemaking has been
submitted to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its
impact on small business.
Comments and Requests for Public
Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are
adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any
comments that are submitted timely to
the IRS as prescribed in this preamble
under the ‘‘Addresses’’ heading.
Treasury and the IRS request comments
on all aspects of the proposed rules. All
comments will be available at
www.regulations.gov or upon request. A
public hearing will be scheduled if
requested in writing by any person who
timely submits written comments. If a
public hearing is scheduled, notice of
the date, time and place for the hearing
will be published in the Federal
Register.
Drafting Information
The principal authors of these
proposed regulations are Andrew S.
Braden, Frank W. Dunham III, and
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
25914
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Stephen J. Toomey of the Office of
Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax
and Accounting). However, other
personnel from the IRS and the Treasury
Department participated in the
development of the regulations.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1—INCOME TAXES
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read in part as
follows:
■
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
■ Par. 2. Section 1.36B–0 is amended
by:
■ 1. Revising the introductory text.
■ 2. Adding new entries for §§ 1.36B–
2(c)(3)(iv) and (c)(3)(v)(A)(5) and 1.36B–
3(c)(2) and (3), and (d)(1), (2), and (3).
■ 3. Revising the entries for §§ 1.36B–
2(c)(3)(v)(A)(4) and 1.36B–3(c)(4).
■ 4. Adding new entries for § 1.36B–6.
The revisions and additions read as
follows.
§ 1.36B–0
Table of contents.
This section lists the captions
contained in §§ 1.36B–1 through 1.36B–
6.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 1.36B–2
credit.
Eligibility for premium tax
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) Post-employment coverage.
(v) * * *
(A) * * *
(4) Wellness incentives.
(5) Employer contributions to health
reimbursement arrangements.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 1.36B–3 Computing the premium
assistance credit amount.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) Child born or adopted during a
month.
(3) Premiums paid for a taxpayer.
(4) Examples.
(d) * * *
(1) In general.
(2) Mid-month termination of
coverage.
(3) Example.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 1.36B–6
Minimum value.
(a) In general.
(b) MV standard population.
(c) MV percentage.
(1) In general.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
(2) Wellness incentives.
(i) In general.
(ii) Example.
(3) Health savings accounts.
(4) Health reimbursement
arrangements.
(5) Expected spending adjustments for
health savings accounts and health
reimbursement arrangements.
(d) Methods for determining MV.
(e) Scope of essential health benefits
and adjustment for benefits not
included in MV Calculator.
(f) Actuarial certification.
(1) In general.
(2) Membership in American
Academy of Actuaries.
(3) Actuarial analysis.
(4) Use of MV Calculator.
(g) Effective/applicability date.
■ Par. 3. Section 1.36B–1 is amended by
revising paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(B) and
adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:
§ 1.36B–1
Premium tax credit definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) Are required to file a return of tax
imposed by section 1 for the taxable
year.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Rating area. The term rating area
has the same meaning as used in section
2701(a)(2) of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg(a)(2)) and 45 CFR
156.255.
*
*
*
*
*
■ Par. 4. Section 1.36B–2 is amended
by:
■ 1. Revising paragraphs (c)(3)(iv),
(c)(3)(v)(A)(4), and (c)(3)(vi).
■ 2. Adding paragraphs (c)(3)(v)(A)(5)
and (c)(3)(v)(D), Example 9.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 1.36B–2
credit.
Eligibility for premium tax
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) Post-employment coverage. A
former employee who may enroll in
continuation coverage required under
Federal law or a State law that provides
comparable continuation coverage, and
an individual who may enroll in retiree
coverage under an eligible employersponsored plan, are eligible for
minimum essential coverage under this
coverage only for months that the
individual is enrolled in the coverage.
*
*
*
*
*
(v) * * *
(A) * * *
(4) Wellness incentives.
Nondiscriminatory wellness program
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
incentives offered by an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that affect
premiums are treated as earned in
determining an employee’s required
contribution for purposes of
affordability of an eligible employersponsored plan to the extent the
incentives relate to tobacco use.
Wellness program incentives that do not
relate to tobacco use are treated as not
earned for this purpose.
(5) Employer contributions to health
reimbursement arrangements. Amounts
newly made available for the current
plan year under a health reimbursement
arrangement that is integrated with an
eligible employer-sponsored plan and
that an employee may use to pay
premiums are counted toward the
employee’s required contribution.
*
*
*
*
*
(D) * * *
Example 9. Wellness incentives. (i)
Employer X offers an eligible employersponsored plan with a nondiscriminatory
wellness program that reduces premiums by
$300 for employees who do not use tobacco
products or who complete a smoking
cessation course. Premiums are reduced by
$200 if an employee completes cholesterol
screening within the first six months of the
plan year. Employee B does not use tobacco
and the cost of his premiums is $3,700.
Employee C uses tobacco and the cost of her
premiums is $4,000.
(ii) Under paragraph (c)(3)(v)(A)(4) of this
section, only the incentives related to tobacco
use are counted toward the premium amount
used to determine the affordability of X’s
plan. C is treated as having earned the $300
incentive for attending a smoking cessation
course. Thus, the employee’s required
contribution to premium for determining
affordability for both Employees B and C is
$3,700. The $200 incentive for completing
cholesterol screening is disregarded.
(vi) Minimum value. See § 1.36B–6 for
rules for determining whether an
eligible employer-sponsored plan
provides minimum value.
*
*
*
*
*
■ Par. 5. Section 1.36B–3 is amended
by:
■ 1. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(2) and
(c)(3) as paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) and
adding a new paragraph (c)(2).
■ 2. Revising paragraphs (d), (g)(2),
(j)(1), and (j)(3).
■ 3. Adding a sentence to the end of
paragraph (e).
■ 4. Adding paragraph (f)(4).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 1.36B–3 Computing the premium
assistance credit amount.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) Child born or adopted during a
month. A child enrolled in a qualified
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
25915
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
health plan in the month of the child’s
birth, adoption, or placement with the
taxpayer for adoption or in foster care,
is treated as enrolled as of the first day
of the month for purposes of this
paragraph (c).
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Premium assistance amount—(1)
In general. Except as provided in
paragraph (d)(2) of this section, the
premium assistance amount for a
coverage month is the lesser of—
(i) The premiums for the month for
one or more qualified health plans in
which a taxpayer or a member of the
taxpayer’s family enrolls; or
(ii) The excess of the adjusted
monthly premium for the applicable
benchmark plan over 1/12 of the
product of a taxpayer’s household
income and the applicable percentage
for the taxable year.
(2) Mid-month termination of
coverage. If a qualified health plan is
terminated before the last day of a
month and, as a result, the issuer
reduces or refunds a portion of the
monthly premium, the premium
assistance amount for the coverage
month is the amount that would apply
under paragraph (d)(1) of this section for
the entire month multiplied by a
fraction, the numerator of which is the
number of days of enrollment in the
month and the denominator of which is
the number of days in the month.
(3) Example. The following example
illustrates the provisions of this
paragraph (d):
Example. (i) Taxpayer R is single and has
no dependents. R enrolls in a qualified health
plan for 2014 with a monthly premium of
$450. The adjusted monthly premium for R’s
applicable benchmark plan is $490 and 1/12
of the product of R’s household income and
applicable percentage for 2014 (R’s
contribution amount) is $190. R takes a new
job in September of 2014, enrolls in the
employer-sponsored plan, and terminates his
enrollment in the qualified health plan,
effective on September 10, 2014. The issuer
of R’s qualified health plan refunds 2⁄3 of the
September premium for R’s coverage.
(ii) Under paragraph (d)(1) of this section,
R’s premium assistance amount for the
months January–August of 2014 is $300, the
lesser of $450 (the monthly premium for the
plan in which R enrolls) and $300 (the excess
of the adjusted monthly premium for R’s
applicable benchmark plan ($490) over R’s
contribution amount ($190)). Under
paragraph (d)(2) of this section, R’s premium
assistance amount for September is $100, the
premium assistance amount for September
had R been enrolled for the full month
($300), times 10/30 (the number of days R is
enrolled in September, over the number of
days in September).
(e) * * * The adjusted monthly
premium is determined as if all
members of the coverage family for that
month were enrolled in the qualified
health plan for the entire month.
(f) * * *
(4) Family members residing at
different locations. The premium for the
applicable benchmark plan determined
under paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this
section for family members who live in
different States and enroll in separate
qualified health plans is the sum of the
premiums for the applicable benchmark
plans for each group of family members
living in the same State.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(2) Applicable percentage table.
Initial
percentage
Household income percentage of Federal poverty line
Less than 133% .......................................................................................................................................................
At least 133% but less than 150% ..........................................................................................................................
At least 150% but less than 200% ..........................................................................................................................
At least 200% but less than 250% ..........................................................................................................................
At least 250% but less than 300% ..........................................................................................................................
At least 300% but not more than 400% ..................................................................................................................
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
*
*
*
*
*
(j) Additional benefits—(1) In general.
If a qualified health plan offers benefits
in addition to the essential health
benefits a qualified health plan must
provide under section 1302 of the
Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18022),
or a State requires a qualified health
plan to cover benefits in addition to
these essential health benefits, the
portion of the premium for the plan
properly allocable to the additional
benefits is excluded from the monthly
premiums under paragraph (d)(1) or
(d)(2) of this section. Premiums are
allocated to additional benefits before
determining the applicable benchmark
plan under paragraph (f) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Examples. The following examples
illustrate the rules of this paragraph (j):
Example 1. (i) Taxpayer B enrolls in a
qualified health plan that provides benefits
in addition to essential health benefits
(additional benefits). The monthly premium
for the plan in which B enrolls is $370, of
which $35 is allocable to additional benefits.
The premium for B’s applicable benchmark
plan (determined after allocating premiums
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
to additional benefits for all silver level
plans) is $440, of which $40 is allocable to
additional benefits. B’s contribution amount,
which is the product of B’s household
income and the applicable percentage, is $60.
(ii) Under this paragraph (j), the premium
for the qualified health plan in which B
enrolls and the applicable benchmark
premium are reduced by the portion of the
premium that is allocable to the additional
benefits provided under that plan. Therefore,
the premium for the qualified health plan in
which B enrolls is reduced to $335
($370¥$35) and the premium for B’s
applicable benchmark plan is reduced to
$400 ($440¥$40). B’s premium assistance
amount for a coverage month is $335, the
lesser of $335 (the premium for the qualified
health plan in which B enrolls, reduced by
the portion of the premium allocable to
additional benefits) and $340 (the premium
for B’s applicable benchmark plan, reduced
by the portion of the premium allocable to
additional benefits ($400), minus B’s $60
contribution amount).
Example 2. The facts are the same as in
Example 1, except that the plan in which B
enrolls provides no benefits in addition to
the essential health benefits required to be
provided by the plan. Thus, under paragraph
(j) of this section, the premium for B’s
applicable benchmark plan ($440) is reduced
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Final
percentage
2.0
3.0
4.0
6.3
8.05
9.5
2.0
4.0
6.3
8.05
9.5
9.5
by the portion of the premium allocable to
additional benefits provided under that plan
($40). The premium for the plan in which B’s
enrolls ($370) is not reduced under this
paragraph (j). B’s premium assistance amount
for a coverage month is $340, the lesser of
$370 (the premium for the qualified health
plan in which B enrolls) and $340 (the
premium for B’s applicable benchmark plan,
reduced by the portion of the premium
allocable to additional benefits ($400), minus
B’s $60 contribution amount).
*
*
*
*
*
Par. 6. Section 1.36B–6 is added to
read as follows:
■
§ 1.36B–6
Minimum value.
(a) In general. An eligible employersponsored plan provides minimum
value (MV) only if the plan’s share of
the total allowed costs of benefits
provided to an employee (the MV
percentage) is at least 60 percent.
(b) MV standard population. The MV
standard population is a standard
population developed and described
through summary statistics by the
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS). The MV standard
population is based on the population
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
25916
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 86 / Friday, May 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
covered by typical self-insured group
health plans.
(c) MV percentage—(1) In general. An
eligible employer-sponsored plan’s MV
percentage is—
(i) The plan’s anticipated covered
medical spending for benefits provided
under a particular essential health
benefits (EHB) benchmark plan
described in 45 CFR 156.110 (EHB
coverage) for the MV standard
population based on the plan’s costsharing provisions;
(ii) Divided by the total anticipated
allowed charges for EHB coverage
provided to the MV standard
population; and
(iii) Expressed as a percentage.
(2) Wellness incentives—(i) In general.
Nondiscriminatory wellness program
incentives offered by an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that affect
deductibles, copayments, or other costsharing are treated as earned in
determining the plan’s MV percentage
to the extent the incentives relate to
tobacco use. These wellness program
incentives that do not relate to tobacco
use are treated as not earned.
(ii) Example. The following example
illustrates the rules of this paragraph
(c)(2):
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Example. (i) Employer X offers an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that reduces the
deductible by $300 for employees who do not
use tobacco products or who complete a
smoking cessation course. The deductible is
reduced by $200 if an employee completes
cholesterol screening within the first six
months of the plan year. Employee B does
not use tobacco and his deductible is $3,700.
Employee C uses tobacco and her deductible
is $4,000.
(ii) Under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this
section, only the incentives related to tobacco
use are considered in determining the plan’s
MV percentage. C is treated as having earned
the $300 incentive for attending a smoking
cessation course. Thus, the deductible for
determining for the MV percentage for both
Employees B and C is $3,700. The $200
incentive for completing cholesterol
screening is disregarded.
(3) Health savings accounts. Employer
contributions for the current plan year
to health savings accounts that are
offered with an eligible employersponsored plan are taken into account
for that plan year towards the plan’s MV
percentage.
(4) Health reimbursement
arrangements. Amounts newly made
available for the current plan year under
a health reimbursement arrangement
that is integrated with an eligible
employer-sponsored plan are taken into
account for that plan year towards the
plan’s MV percentage if the amounts
may be used only to reduce cost-sharing
for covered medical expenses.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 May 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
(5) Expected spending adjustments for
health savings accounts and health
reimbursement arrangements. The
amount taken into account under
paragraph (c)(3) or (c)(4) of this section
is the amount of expected spending for
health care costs in a benefit year.
(d) Methods for determining MV. An
eligible employer-sponsored plan may
use one of the following methods to
determine whether the plan provides
MV—
(1) The MV Calculator made available
by HHS and IRS, with adjustments
permitted by paragraph (e) of this
section;
(2) One of the safe harbors established
by HHS and IRS and described in
published guidance, see § 601.601(d) of
this chapter;
(3) Actuarial certification, as
described in paragraph (f) of this
section, if an eligible employersponsored plan has nonstandard
features that are not compatible with the
MV Calculator and may materially affect
the MV percentage; or
(4) For plans in the small group
market, conformance with the
requirements for a level of metal
coverage defined at 45 CFR 156.140(b)
(bronze, silver, gold, or platinum).
(e) Scope of essential health benefits
and adjustment for benefits not
included in MV Calculator. An eligible
employer-sponsored plan may include
in calculating its MV percentage all
benefits included in any EHB
benchmark (as defined in 45 CFR part
156). An MV percentage that is
calculated using the MV Calculator may
be adjusted based on an actuarial
analysis that complies with the
requirements of paragraph (f) of this
section to the extent of the value of
these benefits that are outside the
parameters of the MV Calculator.
(f) Actuarial certification—(1) In
general. An actuarial certification under
paragraph (d)(3) of this section must
satisfy the requirements of this
paragraph (f).
(2) Membership in American
Academy of Actuaries. The actuary
must be a member of the American
Academy of Actuaries.
(3) Actuarial analysis. The actuary’s
analysis must be performed in
accordance with generally accepted
actuarial principles and methodologies
and specific standards that may be
provided in published guidance, see
§ 601.601(d) of this chapter.
(4) Use of MV Calculator. The actuary
must use the MV Calculator to
determine the plan’s MV percentage for
coverage the plan provides that is
measurable by the MV Calculator. The
actuary may perform an actuarial
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
analysis of the plan’s EHB coverage for
the MV standard population for benefits
not measured by the MV Calculator to
determine the effect of nonstandard
features that are not compatible with the
MV Calculator. The actuary may certify
the plan’s MV percentage based on the
MV percentage that results from use of
the MV Calculator and the actuarial
analysis of the plan’s coverage that is
not measured by the MV calculator.
(g) Effective/applicability date. This
section applies for taxable years ending
after December 31, 2013.
■ Par. 7. Section 1.6011–8 is amended
by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
§ 1.6011–8 Requirement of income tax
return for taxpayers who claim the premium
tax credit under section 36B.
(a) Requirement of return. A taxpayer
who receives advance payments of the
premium tax credit under section 36B
must file an income tax return for that
taxable year on or before the due date
for the return (including extensions of
time for filing).
*
*
*
*
*
Steven T. Miller,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2013–10463 Filed 4–30–13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 0, 2, 15 and 68
[ET Docket No. 13–44; FCC 13–19]
Authorization of Radiofrequency
Equipment
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document proposes
certain changes to the Commission’s
equipment authorization processes to
ensure that they continue to operate
efficiently and effectively. In particular,
it addresses the role of TCBs in
certifying RF equipment and postmarket surveillance, as well as the
Commission’s role in assessing TCB
performance. It also addresses the role
of test laboratories in the RF equipment
approval process, including
accreditation of test labs and the
Commission’s recognition of laboratory
accreditation bodies, and measurement
procedures used to determine RF
equipment compliance. The
Commission believes that the changes
proposed will enable new and
E:\FR\FM\03MYP1.SGM
03MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 86 (Friday, May 3, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25909-25916]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10463]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[REG-125398-12]
RIN 1545-BL43
Minimum Value of Eligible Employer-Sponsored Plans and Other
Rules Regarding the Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains proposed regulations relating to the
health insurance premium tax credit enacted by the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010, as amended by the Medicare and Medicaid
Extenders Act of 2010, the Comprehensive 1099 Taxpayer Protection and
Repayment of Exchange Subsidy Overpayments Act of 2011, and the
Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act,
2011. These proposed regulations affect individuals who enroll in
qualified health plans through Affordable Insurance Exchanges
(Exchanges) and claim the premium tax credit, and Exchanges that make
qualified health plans available to individuals and employers. These
proposed regulations also provide guidance on determining whether
health coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan provides
minimum value and affect employers that offer health coverage and their
employees.
DATES: Written (including electronic) comments and requests for a
public hearing must be received by July 2, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to: CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-125398-12), Room
5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station,
Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through
Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-
125398-12), Courier's Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC, or sent electronically via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-125398-12).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the proposed regulations,
Andrew S. Braden, (202) 622-4960; concerning the submission of comments
and/or requests for a public hearing, Oluwafunmilayo Taylor, (202) 622-
7180 (not toll-free calls).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Beginning in 2014, under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act, Public Law 111-148 (124 Stat. 119 (2010)), and the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Public Law 111-152 (124 Stat.
1029 (2010)) (collectively, the Affordable Care Act), eligible
individuals who purchase coverage under a qualified health plan through
an Affordable Insurance Exchange may receive a premium tax credit under
section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code (Code). Section 36B was
subsequently amended by the Medicare and Medicaid Extenders Act of
2010, Public Law 111-309 (124 Stat. 3285 (2010)); the Comprehensive
1099 Taxpayer Protection and Repayment of Exchange Subsidy Overpayments
Act of 2011, Public Law 112-9 (125 Stat. 36 (2011)); and the Department
of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, Public
Law 112-10 (125 Stat. 38 (2011)).
Notice 2012-31 (2012-20 IRB 910) requested comments on methods for
determining whether health coverage under an eligible employer-
sponsored plan provides minimum value (MV). Final regulations under
section 36B (TD 9590) were published on May 23, 2012 (77 FR 30377). The
final regulations requested comments on issues to be addressed in
further guidance. The comments have been considered in developing these
proposed regulations.
Minimum Value
Individuals generally may not receive a premium tax credit if they
are eligible for affordable coverage under an eligible employer-
sponsored plan that provides MV. An applicable large employer (as
defined in section 4980H(c)(2)) may be liable for an assessable payment
under section 4980H if a full-time employee receives a premium tax
credit.
Under section 36B(c)(2)(C)(ii), a plan fails to provide MV if the
plan's share of the total allowed costs of benefits provided under the
plan is less than 60 percent of the costs. Section 1302(d)(2)(C) of the
Affordable Care Act provides that, in determining the percentage of the
total allowed costs of benefits provided under a group health plan, the
regulations promulgated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services
(HHS) under section 1302(d)(2) apply.
HHS published final regulations under section 1302(d)(2) on
February 25, 2013 (78 FR 12834). The HHS regulations at 45 CFR 156.20
define the percentage of the total allowed costs of
[[Page 25910]]
benefits provided under a group health plan as (1) The anticipated
covered medical spending for essential health benefits (EHB) coverage
(as defined in 45 CFR 156.110(a)) paid by a health plan for a standard
population, (2) computed in accordance with the plan's cost-sharing,
and (3) divided by the total anticipated allowed charges for EHB
coverage provided to a standard population. In addition, 45 CFR
156.145(c) provides that the standard population used to compute this
percentage for MV (as developed by HHS for this purpose) reflects the
population covered by typical self-insured group health plans.
The HHS regulations describe several options for determining MV.
Under 45 CFR 156.145(a)(1), plans may use the MV Calculator (available
at https://cciio.cms.gov/resources/regulations/).
Alternatively, 45 CFR 156.145(a)(2) provides that a plan may determine
MV through a safe harbor established by HHS and IRS. For plans with
nonstandard features that are incompatible with the MV Calculator or a
safe harbor, 45 CFR 156.145(a)(3) provides that the plan may determine
MV through an actuarial certification from a member of the American
Academy of Actuaries after performing an analysis in accordance with
generally accepted actuarial principles and methodologies. Finally, 45
CFR 156.145(a)(4) provides that a plan in the small group market
satisfies MV if it meets the requirements for any of the levels of
metal coverage defined at 45 CFR 156.140(b) (bronze, silver, gold, or
platinum).
Miscellaneous Provisions Under Section 36B
To be eligible for a premium tax credit, an individual must be an
applicable taxpayer. Under section 36B(c)(1), an applicable taxpayer is
a taxpayer whose household income for the taxable year is between 100
percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty line (FPL) for the
taxpayer's family size.
Section 36B(b)(1) provides that the premium assistance credit
amount is the sum of the premium assistance amounts for all coverage
months in the taxable year for individuals in the taxpayer's family.
The premium assistance amount for a coverage month is the lesser of (1)
the premiums for the month for one or more qualified health plans that
cover a taxpayer or family member, or (2) the excess of the adjusted
monthly premium for the second lowest cost silver plan (as described in
section 1302(d)(1)(B) of the Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C.
18022(d)(1)(B)) (the benchmark plan) that applies to the taxpayer over
1/12 of the product of the taxpayer's household income and the
applicable percentage for the taxable year. The adjusted monthly
premium, in general, is the premium an insurer would charge for the
plan adjusted only for the ages of the covered individuals.
Under section 36B(c)(2)(A), a coverage month is any month for which
the taxpayer or a family member is covered by a qualified health plan
enrolled in through an Exchange and the premium is paid by the taxpayer
or through an advance credit payment. Section 36B(c)(2) provides that a
month is not a coverage month for an individual who is eligible for
other minimum essential coverage. If the other coverage is eligible
employer-sponsored coverage, however, it is treated as minimum
essential coverage only if it is affordable and provides MV. Eligible
employer-sponsored coverage is affordable for an employee and related
individuals if the portion of the annual premium the employee must pay
for self-only coverage does not exceed the required contribution
percentage (9.5 percent for taxable years beginning before January 1,
2015) of the taxpayer's household income. The MV requirement is
discussed in the Explanation of Provisions.
Any arrangement under which employees are required, as a condition
of employment or otherwise, to be enrolled in an employer-sponsored
plan that does not provide minimum value or is unaffordable, and that
does not give the employees an effective opportunity to terminate or
decline the coverage, raises a variety of issues. Proposed regulations
under section 4980H indicate that if an employer maintains such an
arrangement it would not be treated as having made an offer of
coverage. As a result, an applicable large employer could be subject to
an assessable payment under that section. See Proposed Sec. 54.4980H-
4(b), 78 FR 250 (January 2, 2013). Such an arrangement would also raise
additional concerns. For example, it is questionable whether the law
permits interference with an individual's ability to apply for a
section 36B premium tax credit by seeking to involuntarily impose
coverage that does not provide minimum value. (See, for example, the
Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended by section 1558 of the Affordable
Care Act, 29 U.S.C. 218c(a).) If an employer sought to involuntarily
impose on its employees coverage that did not provide minimum value or
was unaffordable, the IRS and Treasury, as well as other relevant
departments, may treat such arrangements as impermissible interference
with an employee's ability to access premium tax credits, as
contemplated by the Affordable Care Act.
Explanation of Provisions and Summary of Comments
1. Minimum Value
a. In General
The proposed regulations refer to the proportion of the total
allowed costs of benefits provided to an employee that are paid by the
plan as the plan's MV percentage. The MV percentage is determined by
dividing the cost of certain benefits (described in paragraph b.) the
plan would pay for a standard population by the total cost of certain
benefits for the standard population, including amounts the plan pays
and amounts the employee pays through cost-sharing, and then converting
the result to a percentage.
b. Health Benefits Measured in Determining MV
Commentators sought clarification of the health benefits considered
in determining the share of benefit costs paid by a plan. Some
commentators maintained that MV should be based on the plan's share of
the cost of coverage for all EHBs, including those a plan does not
offer. Other commentators suggested that the MV percentage should be
based on the plan's share of the costs of only those categories of EHBs
the plan covers.
The proposed regulations do not require employer-sponsored self-
insured and insured large group plans to cover every EHB category or
conform their plans to an EHB benchmark that applies to qualified
health plans. The preamble to the HHS regulations (see 78 FR 12833)
notes that employer-sponsored group health plans are not required to
offer EHBs unless they are health plans offered in the small group
market subject to section 2707(a) of the Public Health Service Act. The
preamble also states that, under section 1302(d)(2) of the Affordable
Care Act, MV is measured based on the provision of EHBs to a standard
population and plans may account for any benefits covered by the
employer that also are covered in any one of the EHB-benchmark plans.
See 45 CFR 156.145(b)(2).
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.145(a)-(c) and the assumptions described
in Notice 2012-31, these proposed regulations provide that MV is based
on the anticipated spending for a standard population. The plan's
anticipated spending for benefits provided under any particular EHB-
benchmark plan for any State counts towards MV.
[[Page 25911]]
c. Health reimbursement arrangements, health savings accounts, and
wellness program incentives
i. Arrangements That Reduce Cost-Sharing
Some commentators suggested that current year health savings
account (HSA) contributions and amounts newly made available under a
health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) should be fully counted toward
the plan's share of costs included in calculating MV. Some commentators
suggested that only HRA contributions that may be used to pay for cost
sharing and not HRAs restricted to other uses should be counted in the
MV calculation.
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.135(c), the proposed regulations provide
that all amounts contributed by an employer for the current plan year
to an HSA are taken into account in determining the plan's share of
costs for purposes of MV and are treated as amounts available for first
dollar coverage. Amounts newly made available under an HRA that is
integrated with an eligible employer-sponsored plan for the current
plan year count for purposes of MV in the same manner if the amounts
may be used only for cost-sharing and may not be used to pay insurance
premiums. It is anticipated that regulations will provide that whether
an HRA is integrated with an eligible employer-sponsored plan is
determined under rules that apply for purposes of section 2711 of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-11). Commentators offered
differing opinions about how nondiscriminatory wellness program
incentives that may affect an employee's cost sharing should be taken
into account for purposes of the MV calculation. Some commentators
noted that the rules governing wellness incentives require that they be
available to all similarly situated individuals. These commentators
suggested that because eligible individuals have the opportunity to
reduce their cost-sharing if they choose, a plan's share of costs
should be based on the costs paid by individuals who satisfy the terms
of the wellness program. Other commentators expressed concern that,
despite the safeguards of the regulations governing wellness
incentives, certain individuals inevitably will face barriers to
participation and fail to qualify for rewards. These commentators
suggested that a plan's share of costs should be determined without
assuming that individuals would qualify for the reduced cost-sharing
available under a wellness program.
The proposed regulations provide that a plan's share of costs for
MV purposes is determined without regard to reduced cost-sharing
available under a nondiscriminatory wellness program. However, for
nondiscriminatory wellness programs designed to prevent or reduce
tobacco use, MV may be calculated assuming that every eligible
individual satisfies the terms of the program relating to prevention or
reduction of tobacco use. This exception is consistent with other
Affordable Care Act provisions (such as the ability to charge higher
premiums based on tobacco use) reflecting a policy about individual
responsibility regarding tobacco use.
ii. Arrangements That Reduce Premiums
Section 36B(c)(2)(C)(i)(II) and the final regulations provide that
eligible employer-sponsored coverage is affordable only if an
employee's required contribution for self-only coverage does not exceed
9.5 percent of household income. The preamble to the final regulations
indicated that rules for determining how HRAs and wellness program
incentives are counted in determining the affordability of eligible
employer-sponsored coverage would be provided in later guidance.
Some commentators asserted that an employer's entire annual
contribution to an HRA plus prior year contributions should be taken
into account in determining affordability. The proposed regulations
provide that amounts newly made available under an HRA that is
integrated with an eligible employer-sponsored plan for the current
plan year are taken into account only in determining affordability if
the employee may use the amounts only for premiums or may choose to use
the amounts for either premiums or cost-sharing. Treating amounts that
may be used either for premiums or cost-sharing only towards
affordability prevents double counting the HRA amounts when assessing
MV and affordability of eligible employer-sponsored coverage.
It is anticipated that regulations under section 5000A will provide
that amounts newly made available under an HRA that is integrated with
an eligible employer-sponsored plan for the current plan year are also
taken into account for purposes of the affordability exemption under
section 5000A(e)(1) if the employee may use the amounts only for
premiums or for either premiums or cost-sharing.
The final regulations requested specific comments on the nature of
wellness incentives and how they should be treated for determining
affordability. Commentators expressed similar views about the treatment
of wellness incentives that affect the cost of premiums as about the
treatment of wellness incentives that affect cost-sharing.
Like the rule for determining MV, the proposed regulations provide
that the affordability of an employer-sponsored plan is determined by
assuming that each employee fails to satisfy the requirements of a
wellness program, except the requirements of a nondiscriminatory
wellness program related to tobacco use. Thus, the affordability of a
plan that charges a higher initial premium for tobacco users will be
determined based on the premium that is charged to non-tobacco users,
or tobacco users who complete the related wellness program, such as
attending smoking cessation classes.
In many circumstances these rules relating to the effect of
premium-related wellness program rewards on affordability will have no
practical consequences. They matter only when the employer sets the
level of the employee's required contribution to self-only premium, and
establishes a wellness program that provides for a level of premium
discount, in such a manner that the employee's required contribution to
premium would exceed 9.5 percent of household income (or wages, under
an affordability safe harbor under the section 4980H proposed
regulations) but for the potential premium discount under the wellness
program. If, for example, the employee's household income was at least
$25,000, and the employee's required contribution for self-only
coverage did not exceed $2,375 (9.5 percent of $25,000), the coverage
would be affordable whether or not a wellness premium discount was
taken into account to reduce the $2,375 required contribution.
It is anticipated that regulations under section 5000A will provide
that nondiscriminatory wellness programs that affect premiums will be
treated for purposes of the affordability exemption under section
5000A(e)(1) in the same manner as they are treated for purposes of
determining affordability under section 36B.
Solely for purposes of applying section 4980H and solely for plan
years of an employer's group health plan beginning before January 1,
2015, with respect to an employee described in the next sentence, an
employer will not be subject to an assessable payment under section
4980H(b) with respect to an employee who received a premium tax credit
because the offer of coverage was not affordable or did not satisfy MV,
if the offer of coverage to the employee under the employer's group
health plan would have been affordable or would
[[Page 25912]]
have satisfied MV based on the total required employee premium and
cost-sharing for that group health plan that would have applied to the
employee if the employee satisfied the requirements of any wellness
program described in the next sentence, including a wellness program
with requirements unrelated to tobacco use. The rule in the preceding
sentence applies only (1) To the extent of the reward as of May 3,
2013, expressed as either a dollar amount or a fraction of the total
required employee contribution to the premium (or the employee cost-
sharing, as applicable), (2) under the terms of a wellness program as
in effect on May 3, 2013, and (3) with respect to an employee who is in
a category of employees eligible under the terms of the wellness
program as in effect on May 3, 2013 (regardless of whether the employee
was hired before or after that date). Any required employee
contribution to premium determined based upon assumed satisfaction of
the requirements of a wellness program available under this transition
relief may be applied to the use of an affordability safe harbor
provided in the proposed regulations under section 4980H.
d. Standard Population and Utilization
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.145(c), the proposed regulations provide
that the standard population used to determine MV reflects the
population covered by self-insured group health plans. HHS has
developed the MV standard population and described it through summary
statistics (for example, continuance tables). MV continuance tables and
an explanation of the MV Calculator methodology and the health claims
data HHS has used to develop the continuance tables are available at
https://cciio.cms.gov/resources/regulations/.
e. Methods for Determining Minimum Value
Notice 2012-31 and 45 CFR 156.145(a) describe several methods for
determining MV: the MV Calculator, a safe harbor, actuarial
certification, and, for small group market plans, a metal level. Some
commentators requested that plans be allowed to choose one of the four
methods in determining MV. Other commentators favored requiring
employers to use the most precise method for plans that may be close to
the 60 percent threshold.
The proposed regulations provide that taxpayers may determine
whether a plan provides MV by using the MV Calculator made available by
HHS and the IRS. Taxpayers must use the MV Calculator to measure
standard plan features (unless a safe harbor applies), but the
percentage may be adjusted based on an actuarial analysis of plan
features that are outside the parameters of the calculator.
Certain safe harbor plan designs that satisfy MV will be specified
in additional guidance under section 36B or 4980H, see Sec.
601.601(d). It is anticipated that the guidance will provide that the
safe harbors are examples of plan designs that clearly would satisfy
the 60 percent threshold if measured using the MV Calculator. The safe
harbors are intended to provide an easy way for sponsors of typical
employer-sponsored group health plans to determine whether a plan meets
the MV threshold without having to use the MV Calculator.
Plan designs meeting the following specifications are proposed as
safe harbors for determining MV if the plans cover all of the benefits
included in the MV Calculator: (1) A plan with a $3,500 integrated
medical and drug deductible, 80 percent plan cost-sharing, and a $6,000
maximum out-of-pocket limit for employee cost-sharing; (2) a plan with
a $4,500 integrated medical and drug deductible, 70 percent plan cost-
sharing, a $6,400 maximum out-of-pocket limit, and a $500 employer
contribution to an HSA; and (3) a plan with a $3,500 medical
deductible, $0 drug deductible, 60 percent plan medical expense cost-
sharing, 75 percent plan drug cost-sharing, a $6,400 maximum out-of-
pocket limit, and drug co-pays of $10/$20/$50 for the first, second and
third prescription drug tiers, with 75 percent coinsurance for
specialty drugs. Comments are requested on these and other common plan
designs that would satisfy MV and should be designated as safe harbors.
Consistent with 45 CFR 156.145(a), the proposed regulations require
plans with nonstandard features that cannot determine MV using the MV
Calculator or a safe harbor to use the actuarial certification method.
The actuary must be a member of the American Academy of Actuaries and
must perform the analysis in accordance with generally accepted
actuarial principles and methodologies and any additional standards
that subsequent guidance requires.
f. Other Issues
Commentators suggested a de minimis exception to the MV 60 percent
level of coverage, noting that similar de minimis variations are
permitted in determining actuarial value for qualified health plans.
However, as other commentators noted, permitting a de minimis exception
would have the effect of lowering the minimum level of coverage to a
percentage below 60 percent. Under section 36B(c)(2)(C)(ii), coverage
below 60 percent does not provide MV. Accordingly, the proposed
regulations do not provide for a de minimis exception.
2. Miscellaneous Issues Under Section 36B
a. Definition of Modified Adjusted Gross Income
Section 36B(d)(2) provides that the term household income means the
modified adjusted gross income of the taxpayer plus the modified
adjusted gross income of all members of the taxpayer's family required
to file a tax return under section 1 for the taxable year. The final
regulations provide that the determination of whether a family member
is required to file a return is made without regard to section 1(g)(7).
Under section 1(g)(7), a parent may, if certain requirements are met,
elect to include in the parent's gross income, the gross income of his
or her child. If the parent makes the election, the child is treated as
having no gross income for the taxable year.
The proposed regulations remove ``without regard to section
1(g)(7)'' from the final regulations because that language implies that
the child's gross income is included in both the parent's adjusted
gross income and the child's adjusted gross income in determining
household income. Thus, the proposed regulations clarify that if a
parent makes an election under section 1(g)(7), household income
includes the child's gross income included on the parent's return and
the child is treated as having no gross income.
b. Rating Area
Section 36B(b)(3)(B) determines the applicable benchmark plan by
reference to the rating area where a taxpayer resides. The final
regulations reserved the definition of rating area. The proposed
regulations provide that the term rating area has the same meaning as
used in section 2701(a)(2) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300gg) and 45 CFR 156.255.
c. Retiree Coverage
The section 36B final regulations provide that an individual who
may enroll in continuation coverage required under Federal law or a
State law that provides comparable continuation coverage is eligible
for minimum essential coverage only for months that the individual is
enrolled in the coverage. These proposed regulations apply this rule to
former employees
[[Page 25913]]
only. Active employees eligible for continuation coverage as a result
of reduced hours should be subject to the same rules for eligibility of
affordable employer-sponsored coverage offering MV as other active
employees. The proposed regulations add a comparable rule for health
coverage offered to retired employees (retiree coverage). Accordingly,
an individual who may enroll in retiree coverage is eligible for
minimum essential coverage under the coverage only for the months the
individual is enrolled in the coverage.
d Coverage Month for Newborns and New Adoptees
Under section 36B(c)(2)(A)(i) and the final regulations, a month is
a coverage month for an individual only if, as of the first day of the
month, the individual is enrolled in a qualified health plan through an
Exchange. A child born or adopted during the month is not enrolled in
coverage on the first day and therefore would not be eligible for the
premium tax credit or cost-sharing reductions for that month.
Accordingly, the proposed regulations provide that a child enrolled in
a qualified health plan in the month of the child's birth, adoption, or
placement with the taxpayer for adoption or in foster care, is treated
as enrolled as of the first day of the month.
e. Adjusted Monthly Premium for Family Members Enrolled for Less Than a
Full Month
Under section 36B(c), the premium assistance amount for a coverage
month is computed by reference to the adjusted monthly premium for an
applicable benchmark plan. The final regulations provide that the
applicable benchmark plan is the plan that applies to a taxpayer's
coverage family. The final regulations do not address whether changes
to a coverage family, for example as the result of the birth and
enrollment of a child or the disenrollment of another family member,
that occur during the month affect the premium assistance amount. The
proposed regulations provide that the adjusted monthly premium is
determined as if all members of the coverage family for that month were
enrolled in a qualified health plan for the entire month.
f. Premium Assistance Amount for Partial Months of Coverage
The final regulations do not address the computation of the premium
assistance amount if coverage under a qualified health plan is
terminated during the month. The proposed regulations provide that when
coverage under a qualified health plan is terminated before the last
day of a month and, as a result, the issuer reduces or refunds a
portion of the monthly premium the premium assistance amount for the
month is prorated based on the number of days of coverage in the month.
g. Family Members Residing at Different Locations
The final regulations reserved rules on determining the premium for
the applicable benchmark plan if family members are geographically
separated and enroll in separate qualified health plans. The proposed
regulations provide that the premium for the applicable benchmark plan
in this situation is the sum of the premiums for the applicable
benchmark plans for each group of family members residing in a
different State.
h. Correction to Applicable Percentage Table
The applicable percentage table in the final regulations
erroneously states that the 9.5 percentage applies only to taxpayers
whose household income is less than 400 percent of the FPL. The
proposed regulations clarify that the 9.5 percentage applies to
taxpayers whose household income is not more than 400 percent of the
FPL.
i. Additional Benefits and Applicable Benchmark Plan
Under section 36B(b)(3)(D) and the final regulations, only the
portion of the premium for a qualified health plan properly allocable
to EHBs determines a taxpayer's premium assistance amount. Premiums
allocable to benefits other than EHBs (additional benefits) are
disregarded. The final regulations do not address, however, whether a
taxpayer's benchmark plan is determined before or after premiums have
been allocated to additional benefits. The proposed regulations provide
that premiums are allocated to additional benefits before determining
the applicable benchmark plan. Thus, only essential health benefits are
considered in determining the applicable benchmark plan, consistent
with the requirement in section 36B(b)(3)(D) that only essential health
benefits are considered in determining the premium assistance amount.
In addition, allocating premium to benefits that exceed EHBs before
determining the applicable benchmark plan results in a more accurate
determination of the premium assistance amount.
j. Requirement To File a Return To Reconcile Advance Credit Payments
The final regulations provided that a taxpayer who receives advance
credit payments must file an income tax return for that taxable year on
or before the fifteenth day of the fourth month following the close of
the taxable year. Under the proposed regulations, a taxpayer who
receives advance credit payments must file an income tax return on or
before the due date for the return (including extensions).
Effective/Applicability Date
These regulations are proposed to apply for taxable years ending
after December 31, 2013. Taxpayers may apply the proposed regulations
for taxable years ending before January 1, 2015.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this notice of proposed rulemaking is
not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order
12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, a
regulatory assessment is not required. It has also been determined that
section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 5)
does not apply to these regulations and, because the regulations do not
impose a collection of information on small entities, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to
section 7805(f) of the Code, this notice of proposed rulemaking has
been submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration for comment on its impact on small business.
Comments and Requests for Public Hearing
Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations,
consideration will be given to any comments that are submitted timely
to the IRS as prescribed in this preamble under the ``Addresses''
heading. Treasury and the IRS request comments on all aspects of the
proposed rules. All comments will be available at www.regulations.gov
or upon request. A public hearing will be scheduled if requested in
writing by any person who timely submits written comments. If a public
hearing is scheduled, notice of the date, time and place for the
hearing will be published in the Federal Register.
Drafting Information
The principal authors of these proposed regulations are Andrew S.
Braden, Frank W. Dunham III, and
[[Page 25914]]
Stephen J. Toomey of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Income Tax
and Accounting). However, other personnel from the IRS and the Treasury
Department participated in the development of the regulations.
Proposed Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1--INCOME TAXES
0
Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in
part as follows:
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
0
Par. 2. Section 1.36B-0 is amended by:
0
1. Revising the introductory text.
0
2. Adding new entries for Sec. Sec. 1.36B-2(c)(3)(iv) and
(c)(3)(v)(A)(5) and 1.36B-3(c)(2) and (3), and (d)(1), (2), and (3).
0
3. Revising the entries for Sec. Sec. 1.36B-2(c)(3)(v)(A)(4) and
1.36B-3(c)(4).
0
4. Adding new entries for Sec. 1.36B-6.
The revisions and additions read as follows.
Sec. 1.36B-0 Table of contents.
This section lists the captions contained in Sec. Sec. 1.36B-1
through 1.36B-6.
* * * * *
Sec. 1.36B-2 Eligibility for premium tax credit.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) Post-employment coverage.
(v) * * *
(A) * * *
(4) Wellness incentives.
(5) Employer contributions to health reimbursement arrangements.
* * * * *
Sec. 1.36B-3 Computing the premium assistance credit amount.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) Child born or adopted during a month.
(3) Premiums paid for a taxpayer.
(4) Examples.
(d) * * *
(1) In general.
(2) Mid-month termination of coverage.
(3) Example.
* * * * *
Sec. 1.36B-6 Minimum value.
(a) In general.
(b) MV standard population.
(c) MV percentage.
(1) In general.
(2) Wellness incentives.
(i) In general.
(ii) Example.
(3) Health savings accounts.
(4) Health reimbursement arrangements.
(5) Expected spending adjustments for health savings accounts and
health reimbursement arrangements.
(d) Methods for determining MV.
(e) Scope of essential health benefits and adjustment for benefits
not included in MV Calculator.
(f) Actuarial certification.
(1) In general.
(2) Membership in American Academy of Actuaries.
(3) Actuarial analysis.
(4) Use of MV Calculator.
(g) Effective/applicability date.
0
Par. 3. Section 1.36B-1 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(B)
and adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:
Sec. 1.36B-1 Premium tax credit definitions.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) Are required to file a return of tax imposed by section 1 for
the taxable year.
* * * * *
(n) Rating area. The term rating area has the same meaning as used
in section 2701(a)(2) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300gg(a)(2)) and 45 CFR 156.255.
* * * * *
0
Par. 4. Section 1.36B-2 is amended by:
0
1. Revising paragraphs (c)(3)(iv), (c)(3)(v)(A)(4), and (c)(3)(vi).
0
2. Adding paragraphs (c)(3)(v)(A)(5) and (c)(3)(v)(D), Example 9.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 1.36B-2 Eligibility for premium tax credit.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) Post-employment coverage. A former employee who may enroll in
continuation coverage required under Federal law or a State law that
provides comparable continuation coverage, and an individual who may
enroll in retiree coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan,
are eligible for minimum essential coverage under this coverage only
for months that the individual is enrolled in the coverage.
* * * * *
(v) * * *
(A) * * *
(4) Wellness incentives. Nondiscriminatory wellness program
incentives offered by an eligible employer-sponsored plan that affect
premiums are treated as earned in determining an employee's required
contribution for purposes of affordability of an eligible employer-
sponsored plan to the extent the incentives relate to tobacco use.
Wellness program incentives that do not relate to tobacco use are
treated as not earned for this purpose.
(5) Employer contributions to health reimbursement arrangements.
Amounts newly made available for the current plan year under a health
reimbursement arrangement that is integrated with an eligible employer-
sponsored plan and that an employee may use to pay premiums are counted
toward the employee's required contribution.
* * * * *
(D) * * *
Example 9. Wellness incentives. (i) Employer X offers an
eligible employer-sponsored plan with a nondiscriminatory wellness
program that reduces premiums by $300 for employees who do not use
tobacco products or who complete a smoking cessation course.
Premiums are reduced by $200 if an employee completes cholesterol
screening within the first six months of the plan year. Employee B
does not use tobacco and the cost of his premiums is $3,700.
Employee C uses tobacco and the cost of her premiums is $4,000.
(ii) Under paragraph (c)(3)(v)(A)(4) of this section, only the
incentives related to tobacco use are counted toward the premium
amount used to determine the affordability of X's plan. C is treated
as having earned the $300 incentive for attending a smoking
cessation course. Thus, the employee's required contribution to
premium for determining affordability for both Employees B and C is
$3,700. The $200 incentive for completing cholesterol screening is
disregarded.
(vi) Minimum value. See Sec. 1.36B-6 for rules for determining
whether an eligible employer-sponsored plan provides minimum value.
* * * * *
0
Par. 5. Section 1.36B-3 is amended by:
0
1. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) as paragraphs (c)(3) and
(c)(4) and adding a new paragraph (c)(2).
0
2. Revising paragraphs (d), (g)(2), (j)(1), and (j)(3).
0
3. Adding a sentence to the end of paragraph (e).
0
4. Adding paragraph (f)(4).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 1.36B-3 Computing the premium assistance credit amount.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) Child born or adopted during a month. A child enrolled in a
qualified
[[Page 25915]]
health plan in the month of the child's birth, adoption, or placement
with the taxpayer for adoption or in foster care, is treated as
enrolled as of the first day of the month for purposes of this
paragraph (c).
* * * * *
(d) Premium assistance amount--(1) In general. Except as provided
in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, the premium assistance amount for
a coverage month is the lesser of--
(i) The premiums for the month for one or more qualified health
plans in which a taxpayer or a member of the taxpayer's family enrolls;
or
(ii) The excess of the adjusted monthly premium for the applicable
benchmark plan over 1/12 of the product of a taxpayer's household
income and the applicable percentage for the taxable year.
(2) Mid-month termination of coverage. If a qualified health plan
is terminated before the last day of a month and, as a result, the
issuer reduces or refunds a portion of the monthly premium, the premium
assistance amount for the coverage month is the amount that would apply
under paragraph (d)(1) of this section for the entire month multiplied
by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of days of
enrollment in the month and the denominator of which is the number of
days in the month.
(3) Example. The following example illustrates the provisions of
this paragraph (d):
Example. (i) Taxpayer R is single and has no dependents. R
enrolls in a qualified health plan for 2014 with a monthly premium
of $450. The adjusted monthly premium for R's applicable benchmark
plan is $490 and 1/12 of the product of R's household income and
applicable percentage for 2014 (R's contribution amount) is $190. R
takes a new job in September of 2014, enrolls in the employer-
sponsored plan, and terminates his enrollment in the qualified
health plan, effective on September 10, 2014. The issuer of R's
qualified health plan refunds \2/3\ of the September premium for R's
coverage.
(ii) Under paragraph (d)(1) of this section, R's premium
assistance amount for the months January-August of 2014 is $300, the
lesser of $450 (the monthly premium for the plan in which R enrolls)
and $300 (the excess of the adjusted monthly premium for R's
applicable benchmark plan ($490) over R's contribution amount
($190)). Under paragraph (d)(2) of this section, R's premium
assistance amount for September is $100, the premium assistance
amount for September had R been enrolled for the full month ($300),
times 10/30 (the number of days R is enrolled in September, over the
number of days in September).
(e) * * * The adjusted monthly premium is determined as if all
members of the coverage family for that month were enrolled in the
qualified health plan for the entire month.
(f) * * *
(4) Family members residing at different locations. The premium for
the applicable benchmark plan determined under paragraphs (f)(1) and
(f)(2) of this section for family members who live in different States
and enroll in separate qualified health plans is the sum of the
premiums for the applicable benchmark plans for each group of family
members living in the same State.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(2) Applicable percentage table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Household income percentage of Federal Initial Final
poverty line percentage percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 133%.......................... 2.0 2.0
At least 133% but less than 150%........ 3.0 4.0
At least 150% but less than 200%........ 4.0 6.3
At least 200% but less than 250%........ 6.3 8.05
At least 250% but less than 300%........ 8.05 9.5
At least 300% but not more than 400%.... 9.5 9.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(j) Additional benefits--(1) In general. If a qualified health plan
offers benefits in addition to the essential health benefits a
qualified health plan must provide under section 1302 of the Affordable
Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18022), or a State requires a qualified health plan
to cover benefits in addition to these essential health benefits, the
portion of the premium for the plan properly allocable to the
additional benefits is excluded from the monthly premiums under
paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this section. Premiums are allocated to
additional benefits before determining the applicable benchmark plan
under paragraph (f) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) Examples. The following examples illustrate the rules of this
paragraph (j):
Example 1. (i) Taxpayer B enrolls in a qualified health plan
that provides benefits in addition to essential health benefits
(additional benefits). The monthly premium for the plan in which B
enrolls is $370, of which $35 is allocable to additional benefits.
The premium for B's applicable benchmark plan (determined after
allocating premiums to additional benefits for all silver level
plans) is $440, of which $40 is allocable to additional benefits.
B's contribution amount, which is the product of B's household
income and the applicable percentage, is $60.
(ii) Under this paragraph (j), the premium for the qualified
health plan in which B enrolls and the applicable benchmark premium
are reduced by the portion of the premium that is allocable to the
additional benefits provided under that plan. Therefore, the premium
for the qualified health plan in which B enrolls is reduced to $335
($370-$35) and the premium for B's applicable benchmark plan is
reduced to $400 ($440-$40). B's premium assistance amount for a
coverage month is $335, the lesser of $335 (the premium for the
qualified health plan in which B enrolls, reduced by the portion of
the premium allocable to additional benefits) and $340 (the premium
for B's applicable benchmark plan, reduced by the portion of the
premium allocable to additional benefits ($400), minus B's $60
contribution amount).
Example 2. The facts are the same as in Example 1, except that
the plan in which B enrolls provides no benefits in addition to the
essential health benefits required to be provided by the plan. Thus,
under paragraph (j) of this section, the premium for B's applicable
benchmark plan ($440) is reduced by the portion of the premium
allocable to additional benefits provided under that plan ($40). The
premium for the plan in which B's enrolls ($370) is not reduced
under this paragraph (j). B's premium assistance amount for a
coverage month is $340, the lesser of $370 (the premium for the
qualified health plan in which B enrolls) and $340 (the premium for
B's applicable benchmark plan, reduced by the portion of the premium
allocable to additional benefits ($400), minus B's $60 contribution
amount).
* * * * *
0
Par. 6. Section 1.36B-6 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 1.36B-6 Minimum value.
(a) In general. An eligible employer-sponsored plan provides
minimum value (MV) only if the plan's share of the total allowed costs
of benefits provided to an employee (the MV percentage) is at least 60
percent.
(b) MV standard population. The MV standard population is a
standard population developed and described through summary statistics
by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The MV standard
population is based on the population
[[Page 25916]]
covered by typical self-insured group health plans.
(c) MV percentage--(1) In general. An eligible employer-sponsored
plan's MV percentage is--
(i) The plan's anticipated covered medical spending for benefits
provided under a particular essential health benefits (EHB) benchmark
plan described in 45 CFR 156.110 (EHB coverage) for the MV standard
population based on the plan's cost-sharing provisions;
(ii) Divided by the total anticipated allowed charges for EHB
coverage provided to the MV standard population; and
(iii) Expressed as a percentage.
(2) Wellness incentives--(i) In general. Nondiscriminatory wellness
program incentives offered by an eligible employer-sponsored plan that
affect deductibles, copayments, or other cost-sharing are treated as
earned in determining the plan's MV percentage to the extent the
incentives relate to tobacco use. These wellness program incentives
that do not relate to tobacco use are treated as not earned.
(ii) Example. The following example illustrates the rules of this
paragraph (c)(2):
Example. (i) Employer X offers an eligible employer-sponsored
plan that reduces the deductible by $300 for employees who do not
use tobacco products or who complete a smoking cessation course. The
deductible is reduced by $200 if an employee completes cholesterol
screening within the first six months of the plan year. Employee B
does not use tobacco and his deductible is $3,700. Employee C uses
tobacco and her deductible is $4,000.
(ii) Under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section, only the
incentives related to tobacco use are considered in determining the
plan's MV percentage. C is treated as having earned the $300
incentive for attending a smoking cessation course. Thus, the
deductible for determining for the MV percentage for both Employees
B and C is $3,700. The $200 incentive for completing cholesterol
screening is disregarded.
(3) Health savings accounts. Employer contributions for the current
plan year to health savings accounts that are offered with an eligible
employer-sponsored plan are taken into account for that plan year
towards the plan's MV percentage.
(4) Health reimbursement arrangements. Amounts newly made available
for the current plan year under a health reimbursement arrangement that
is integrated with an eligible employer-sponsored plan are taken into
account for that plan year towards the plan's MV percentage if the
amounts may be used only to reduce cost-sharing for covered medical
expenses.
(5) Expected spending adjustments for health savings accounts and
health reimbursement arrangements. The amount taken into account under
paragraph (c)(3) or (c)(4) of this section is the amount of expected
spending for health care costs in a benefit year.
(d) Methods for determining MV. An eligible employer-sponsored plan
may use one of the following methods to determine whether the plan
provides MV--
(1) The MV Calculator made available by HHS and IRS, with
adjustments permitted by paragraph (e) of this section;
(2) One of the safe harbors established by HHS and IRS and
described in published guidance, see Sec. 601.601(d) of this chapter;
(3) Actuarial certification, as described in paragraph (f) of this
section, if an eligible employer-sponsored plan has nonstandard
features that are not compatible with the MV Calculator and may
materially affect the MV percentage; or
(4) For plans in the small group market, conformance with the
requirements for a level of metal coverage defined at 45 CFR 156.140(b)
(bronze, silver, gold, or platinum).
(e) Scope of essential health benefits and adjustment for benefits
not included in MV Calculator. An eligible employer-sponsored plan may
include in calculating its MV percentage all benefits included in any
EHB benchmark (as defined in 45 CFR part 156). An MV percentage that is
calculated using the MV Calculator may be adjusted based on an
actuarial analysis that complies with the requirements of paragraph (f)
of this section to the extent of the value of these benefits that are
outside the parameters of the MV Calculator.
(f) Actuarial certification--(1) In general. An actuarial
certification under paragraph (d)(3) of this section must satisfy the
requirements of this paragraph (f).
(2) Membership in American Academy of Actuaries. The actuary must
be a member of the American Academy of Actuaries.
(3) Actuarial analysis. The actuary's analysis must be performed in
accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles and
methodologies and specific standards that may be provided in published
guidance, see Sec. 601.601(d) of this chapter.
(4) Use of MV Calculator. The actuary must use the MV Calculator to
determine the plan's MV percentage for coverage the plan provides that
is measurable by the MV Calculator. The actuary may perform an
actuarial analysis of the plan's EHB coverage for the MV standard
population for benefits not measured by the MV Calculator to determine
the effect of nonstandard features that are not compatible with the MV
Calculator. The actuary may certify the plan's MV percentage based on
the MV percentage that results from use of the MV Calculator and the
actuarial analysis of the plan's coverage that is not measured by the
MV calculator.
(g) Effective/applicability date. This section applies for taxable
years ending after December 31, 2013.
0
Par. 7. Section 1.6011-8 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read
as follows:
Sec. 1.6011-8 Requirement of income tax return for taxpayers who
claim the premium tax credit under section 36B.
(a) Requirement of return. A taxpayer who receives advance payments
of the premium tax credit under section 36B must file an income tax
return for that taxable year on or before the due date for the return
(including extensions of time for filing).
* * * * *
Steven T. Miller,
Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2013-10463 Filed 4-30-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P