Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Exchange Functions: Eligibility for Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum Essential Coverage Provisions, 39493-39529 [2013-15530]
Download as PDF
Vol. 78
Monday,
No. 126
July 1, 2013
Part IV
Department of Health and Human Services
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
45 CFR Parts 155 and 156
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Exchange Functions: Eligibility
for Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum Essential Coverage Provisions;
Final Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39494
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Parts 155 and 156
[CMS–9958–F]
RIN 0938–AR68
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; Exchange Functions: Eligibility for
Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum
Essential Coverage Provisions
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule implements
certain functions of the Affordable
Insurance Exchanges (‘‘Exchanges’’).
These specific statutory functions
include determining eligibility for and
granting certificates of exemption from
the individual shared responsibility
payment described in section 5000A of
the Internal Revenue Code.
Additionally, this final rule implements
the responsibilities of the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, in
coordination with the Secretary of the
Treasury, to designate other health
benefits coverage as minimum essential
coverage by providing that certain
coverage be designated as minimum
essential coverage. It also outlines
substantive and procedural
requirements that other types of
individual coverage must fulfill in order
to be certified as minimum essential
coverage.
DATES: Effective Date: These regulations
are effective on August 26, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Zachary L. Baron, (301) 492–4478, for
provisions related to exemptions from
the individual shared responsibility
payment. Cam Moultrie Clemmons,
(410) 786–1565, for provisions related to
minimum essential coverage.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
Executive Summary
To ensure effective and efficient
implementation of the insurance market
reforms, the Affordable Care Act
requires a nonexempt individual to
maintain minimum essential coverage
or make a shared responsibility
payment. The Affordable Care Act
specifies the categories of individuals
who are eligible to receive exemptions
from the individual shared
responsibility payment under section
5000A of the Internal Revenue Code (the
Code), which provides nonexempt
individuals with a choice: maintain
minimum essential coverage for
themselves and any nonexempt family
members or include an additional
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
payment with their federal income tax
return. Some individuals are exempt
from the shared responsibility payment,
including members of recognized
religious sects whose tenets conflict
with acceptance of the benefits of
private or public insurance and those
who do not have an affordable health
insurance coverage option available.
Section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the Affordable
Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18031(d)(4)(H))
directs the new health insurance
marketplaces, called Affordable
Insurance Exchanges (Exchanges), to
issue certifications of exemption from
the individual shared responsibility
payment to eligible individuals. Section
1411 of the Affordable Care Act (42
U.S.C. 18081) generally provides
procedures for determining an
individual’s eligibility for various
benefits relating to health coverage,
including exemptions from the
application of section 5000A of the
Code.
This final rule sets forth standards
and processes under which the
Exchange will conduct eligibility
determinations for, and grant certificates
of exemption from, the individual
shared responsibility payment.
Furthermore, it supports and
complements rulemaking conducted by
the Secretary of the Treasury with
respect to section 5000A of the Code, as
added by section 1501(b) of the
Affordable Care Act. The intent of this
rule is to implement the relevant
provisions while continuing to afford
states substantial discretion in the
design and operation of an Exchange,
with greater standardization provided
where directed by the statute or where
there are compelling practical,
efficiency, or consumer protection
reasons.
Under section 5000A(f)(1)(E) of the
Code, the Secretary of the Department of
Health and Human Services (the
Secretary), in coordination with the
Secretary of the Treasury, may designate
other health benefits coverage as
minimum essential coverage. This final
rule provides standards for determining
whether certain other types of health
insurance coverage constitute minimum
essential coverage and procedures for
plan sponsors to follow for a plan to be
identified as minimum essential
coverage under section 5000A of the
Code. This rule also designates certain
types of existing health coverage as
minimum essential coverage. Other
types of coverage, not statutorily
specified and not designated as
minimum essential coverage in this
regulation, may be recognized as
minimum essential coverage if certain
substantive and procedural
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
requirements are met as set forth in this
rule. These additional categories of
minimum essential coverage, both those
designated per se and those that may
apply for recognition are neither group
health insurance coverage nor
individual health insurance. Consumers
with types of coverage that are
recognized as minimum essential
coverage in accordance with this rule
would be determined to have minimum
essential coverage if the coverage is
certified to be substantially compliant
with the requirements of title I of the
Affordable Care Act that apply to nongrandfathered plans in the individual
market.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
I. Background
A. Legislative Overview
B. Stakeholder Consultation and Input
C. Alignment With Related Rules and
Published Information
II. Provisions of the Regulation and Analysis
of and Responses to Public Comments
A. Part 155—Exchange Establishment
Standards and Other Related Standards
Under the Affordable Care Act
1. Subpart A—General Provisions
a. Definitions (§ 155.20)
2. Subpart C—General Functions of an
Exchange
a. Functions of an Exchange (§ 155.200)
3. Subpart G—Exchange Functions in the
Individual Market: Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions
a. Definitions and General Requirements
(§ 155.600)
b. Eligibility Standards for Exemptions
(§ 155.605)
c. Eligibility Process for Exemptions
(§ 155.610)
d. Verification Process Related to
Eligibility for Exemptions (§ 155.615)
e. Eligibility Redeterminations for
Exemptions During a Calendar Year
(§ 155.620)
f. Options for Conducting Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions
(§ 155.625)
g. Reporting (§ 155.630)
h. Right To Appeal (§ 155.635)
B. Part 156—Health Insurance Issuer
Standards Under the Affordable Care
Act, Including Standards Related to
Exchanges
a. Definition of Minimum Essential
Coverage (§ 156.600)
b. Other Types of Coverage That Qualify as
Minimum Essential Coverage (§ 156.602)
c. Requirements for Recognition as
Minimum Essential Coverage for
Coverage Not Otherwise Designated
Minimum Essential Coverage in the
Statute or This Regulation (§ 156.604)
d. HHS Audit Authority (§ 156.606)
III. Provisions of the Final Regulation
IV. Collection of Information Requirements
V. Summary of Regulatory Impact Statement
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
VII. Unfunded Mandates
VIII. Federalism
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
IX. Congressional Review Act
Regulation Text
Abbreviations
Affordable Care Act—the Affordable Care Act
of 2010 (which is the collective term for
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act (Pub. L. 111–148) and the Health Care
and Education Reconciliation Act (Pub. L.
111–152))
BHP Basic Health Program
CHIP Children’s Health Insurance Program
CMS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
FPL Federal Poverty Level
HHS Department of Health and Human
Services
IRS Internal Revenue Service
NAIC National Association of Insurance
Commissioners
QHP Qualified Health Plan
SSA Social Security Administration
SSN Social Security Number
Code Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
Amended
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
I. Background
A. Legislative Overview
Section 1501(b) of the Affordable Care
Act added section 5000A of the Internal
Revenue Code (the Code) to a new
chapter 48 of subtitle D (Miscellaneous
Excise Taxes) of the Code effective for
months beginning after December 31,
2013. Section 5000A of the Code, which
was subsequently amended by the
TRICARE Affirmation Act of 2010,
Public Law 111–159 (124 Stat. 1123)
and Public Law 111–173 (124 Stat.
1215), requires that nonexempt
individuals either maintain minimum
essential coverage or make a shared
responsibility payment. It also describes
categories of individuals who may
qualify for an exemption from the
individual shared responsibility
payment, and provides the definition of
minimum essential coverage.
Section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the
Affordable Care Act specifies that the
Exchange will, subject to section 1411 of
the Affordable Care Act, grant
certifications of exemption from the
individual shared responsibility
payment specified in section 5000A of
the Code. Section 1311(d)(4)(I)(i) of the
Affordable Care Act specifies that the
Exchange will transfer to the Secretary
of the Treasury a list of the individuals
to whom the Exchange provided such a
certification. Section 1411(a)(4) of the
Affordable Care Act provides that the
Secretary of Health and Human Services
(the Secretary) will establish a program
for determining whether a certification
of exemption from the individual shared
responsibility requirement and penalty
will be issued by an Exchange under
section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the Affordable
Care Act. We interpret this provision as
authorizing the Secretary to determine
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
‘‘whether,’’ with respect to the nine
exemptions provided for under section
5000A of the Code, Exchanges would
perform the role of issuing certifications
of exemption under section
1311(d)(4)(H) of the Affordable Care
Act, whether eligibility for the
exemption would be claimed solely
through tax filing, or whether both
processes would be available. Under
this interpretation, the responsibility
under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the
Affordable Care Act to issue
certifications of exemption is ‘‘subject
to’’ these determinations by the
Secretary under section 1411(a)(4) of the
Affordable Care Act, and Exchanges are
thus only required to issue certifications
of exemption with respect to
exemptions not exclusively assigned to
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
Section 1321 of the Affordable Care
Act discusses state flexibility in the
operation and enforcement of Exchanges
and related requirements. Section
1321(a) of the Affordable Care Act
provides broad authority for the
Secretary to establish standards and
regulations to implement the statutory
requirements related to Exchanges and
other components of title I of the
Affordable Care Act as amended by the
Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010. Section
1311(k) of the Affordable Care Act
specifies that Exchanges may not
establish rules that conflict with or
prevent the application of regulations
promulgated by the Secretary under
Subtitle D of title I of the Affordable
Care Act.
In accordance with our interpretation
of these sections of the Affordable Care
Act, and the authority provided by, inter
alia, section 1321(a) of the Affordable
Care Act, we specify that under the
program established under section
1411(a)(4) of the Affordable Care Act,
the Exchange will determine eligibility
for and grant certificates of exemption
as described below. We also note that
consistent with prior guidance, in the
State Exchange Implementation
Questions and Answers released by
HHS on November 29, 2011,1 and the
Frequently Asked Questions on
Exchanges, Market Reforms, and
Medicaid released by HHS on December
10, 2012,2 a state-based Exchange can be
approved to operate by the Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS) if
1 State Exchange Implementation Questions and
Answers, published November 29, 2011: https://
cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/Files2/11282011/
exchange_q_and_a.pdf.pdf.
2 Frequently Asked Questions on Exchanges,
Market Reforms, and Medicaid, published
December 10, 2012: https://cciio.cms.gov/resources/
files/exchanges-faqs-12-10-2012.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39495
it uses a federally-managed service to
make eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
On March 27, 2012, HHS published
the final rule entitled ‘‘Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act;
Establishment of Exchanges and
Qualified Health Plans; Exchange
Standards for Employers’’ (77 FR
18309). The provisions of the final rule,
herein referred to as the Exchange final
rule, encompass the key functions of
Exchanges related to eligibility,
enrollment, and plan participation and
management. In the Exchange final rule,
45 CFR 155.200(b) provided that a
minimum function of an Exchange is to
grant certificates of exemption
consistent with sections 1311(d)(4)(H)
and 1411 of the Affordable Care Act.
This final rule cross-references several
provisions in the Exchange final rule,
notably the limited situations where
eligibility and verification processes
used in determining eligibility for
enrollment in a qualified health plan
(QHP) through the Exchange and for
insurance affordability programs can
also be used by Exchanges for the
purpose of determining whether an
individual is eligible for an exemption
from the individual shared
responsibility payment.
Section 5000A(f) of the Code
designates certain types of coverage as
minimum essential coverage. The term
‘‘minimum essential coverage’’ includes
all of the following under the statute:
Government sponsored programs (the
Medicare program under part A of title
XVIII of the Social Security Act (the
Act); the Medicaid program under title
XIX of the Act; the Children’s Health
Insurance Program (CHIP) program
under title XXI of the Act; medical
coverage under chapter 55 of title 10,
United States Code, including the
TRICARE program; a health care
program under chapter 17 or 18 of title
38, United States Code, as determined
by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in
coordination with the Secretaries of the
Department of Health and Human
Services and Treasury; a health plan
under section 2504(e) of title 22, United
States Code (relating to Peace Corps
volunteers); or the Nonappropriated
Fund Health Benefits Program of the
Department of Defense (established
under section 349 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1995); coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan; coverage
under a health plan offered in the
individual market within a State; and
coverage under a grandfathered health
plan. In addition, section 5000A(f)(1)(E)
of the Code directs the Secretary, in
coordination with the Secretary of
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39496
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Treasury, to designate other health
benefits coverage, such as a state health
benefits risk pool, as minimum essential
coverage. This final rule designates
certain additional types of coverage
qualify as minimum essential coverage
and also provides a process by which
other types of coverage could be
recognized as minimum essential
coverage.
B. Stakeholder Consultation and Input
On August 3, 2010, HHS published a
request for comment (the RFC) inviting
the public to provide input regarding
the rules that will govern the Exchanges.
In particular, HHS asked states, tribal
representatives, consumer advocates,
employers, insurers, and other
interested stakeholders to comment on
the standards Exchanges should meet.
The comment period closed on October
4, 2010.
The public response to the RFC
yielded comment submissions from
consumer advocacy organizations,
medical and health care professional
trade associations and societies, medical
and health care professional entities,
health insurers, insurance trade
associations, members of the general
public, and employer organizations. The
majority of the comments were related
to the general functions and standards
for Exchanges, qualified health plans
(QHPs), eligibility and enrollment, and
coordination with Medicaid. While this
final rule does not directly respond to
comments from the RFC, the comments
received are described, where
applicable, in discussing specific
regulatory proposals. These comments
are not separately identified, but instead
are incorporated into each substantive
section of this final rule as appropriate.
In addition to the RFC, HHS received
comments on the proposed rule titled
‘‘Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; Exchange Functions: Eligibility for
Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum
Essential Coverage Provisions’’ (78 FR
7348) that are, similarly not separately
identified, but incorporated into each
substantive section of this final rule.
HHS has also consulted with
stakeholders through regular meetings
with the National Association of
Insurance Commissioners (NAIC),
regular contact with states through the
Exchange grant process, and meetings
with tribal representatives, health
insurance issuers, trade groups,
consumer advocates, employers, and
other interested parties. HHS initiated
and hosted a tribal consultation on
February 21, 2013, where we allowed
federally-recognized tribal leaders and
representatives from tribal health
organizations the opportunity to discuss
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
and provide feedback regarding the
provisions within the proposed rule.
Furthermore, we also received feedback
from health care sharing ministries
about the process for how individual
members can obtain certificates of
exemption based on their membership
in a health care sharing ministry, and an
expression of interest in a process for
allowing health care sharing ministries
to obtain recognition that they meet the
standards under section 5000A(d)(2)(B)
of the Code. We also received
information from various stakeholder
groups regarding types of ‘‘other
coverage’’ as described in section
5000A(f)(1)(E) of the Code.
C. Alignment With Related Rules and
Published Information
The proposed rule, titled ‘‘Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act;
Exchange Functions: Eligibility for
Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum
Essential Coverage Provisions’’ (78 FR
7348), was published in the Federal
Register on February 1, 2013 in
coordination with the Department of
Treasury’s proposed rule, ‘‘Shared
Responsibility Payment for Not
Maintaining Minimum Essential
Coverage’’ (78 FR 7314) (hereinafter
referred to as ‘‘the Treasury proposed
rule’’). The Department of the Treasury’s
proposed rule will be finalized at a later
date. Accordingly, in this final rule, we
have removed cross-references to the
Treasury proposed rule and replaced
them with cross-references to the
applicable language in the Affordable
Care Act. Upon publication of the
Treasury final rule, we intend to replace
the statutory references with the
appropriate regulatory references.
II. Provisions of the Regulation and
Analysis of and Responses to Public
Comments
On February 1, 2013, we published a
proposed rule, titled ‘‘Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act; Exchange
Functions: Eligibility for Exemptions;
Miscellaneous Minimum Essential
Coverage Provisions’’ (78 FR 7348), in
which we proposed to add subpart G to
45 CFR part 155, which includes
standards for Exchanges related to
conducting eligibility determinations for
and granting certificates of exemption
from the individual shared
responsibility payment. We also
proposed to amend § 155.200(a) to add
a reference to indicate that, consistent
with existing language in § 155.200(b),
granting certificates of exemption is a
minimum function of the Exchange.
Furthermore, we proposed to add
subpart G to 45 CFR part 156, which set
forth standards under which the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Secretary would designate certain types
of existing coverage, not specified under
section 5000A, as minimum essential
coverage. Additionally, under the
proposed regulation, other types of
coverage that were neither statutorily
nor regulatory designated as minimum
essential coverage, may be recognized as
minimum essential coverage if certain
substantive and procedural
requirements are met. These types of
coverage, both those designated per se
and those recognized by application, are
neither group health insurance coverage
nor individual health insurance.
Consumers with coverage recognized as
minimum essential coverage in
accordance with this regulation would
be determined to have minimum
essential coverage for purposes of the
individual shared responsibility
provision.
We received approximately 220
public comments from state agencies,
advocacy groups, health care providers,
employers, health insurers, health care
associations, and others. The comments
ranged from general support or
opposition to the proposed provisions to
very specific questions or comments
regarding the proposed rules.
Some comments were outside the
scope of the proposed rule, and
therefore are not addressed in this final
rule. In some instances, commenters
raised policy or operational issues, such
as those related to certified application
counselors, authorized representatives,
and eligibility appeals, that will be
addressed through forthcoming
regulatory and subregulatory guidance
to be provided subsequent to this final
rule; therefore, some, but not all
comments are addressed in the
preamble to this final rule.
Brief summaries of each proposed
provision, a summary of the public
comments we received (with the
exception of specific comments on the
paperwork burden or the regulatory
impact analysis), and our responses to
the comments are below. Comments
related to the paperwork burden are
addressed in the ‘‘Collection of
Information Requirements’’ and section
in this final rule. We did not receive
comments related to the impact
analysis.
A. Part 155—Exchange Establishment
Standards and Other Related Standards
Under the Affordable Care Act
1. Subpart A—General Provisions
a. Definitions (§ 155.20)
We proposed to make a technical
correction to the definitions of
‘‘applicant’’ and ‘‘application filer’’ to
note that they do not apply to an
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
applicant or application filer seeking an
exemption pursuant to proposed
subpart G. We proposed separate
definitions specific to exemptions for
these terms in § 155.600.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concerns about HHS’ preexisting definition of ‘‘application filer’’
in § 155.20 based on its cross-reference
to the definition of ‘‘family’’ within the
Code and the inclusion of this definition
as proposed in § 155.600(a).
Commenters believed the inclusion of
the definition of ‘‘family’’ within the
Code would limit the flexibility of an
applicant to include people who would
have relationships that may otherwise
be included on an exemption
application. Commenters believed that
these cross-references were inconsistent
with other provisions, as they noted that
subject to state rules, QHP issuers can
allow individuals in multiple tax
households to enroll in a QHP together,
and that HHS has proposed to define
‘‘dependent’’ in 78 FR 4718 for purposes
of eligibility for special enrollment
periods based on whether a QHP issuer
will allow individuals to enroll in a
QHP together. As such, they urged HHS
to remove the references to the
definition of family within the Code and
its implementing regulation.
Response: The commenters correctly
describe different situations in which
recognition of relationships is
determined by who can enroll in a QHP
together. In proposing to amend the
definition of ‘‘application filer’’ in
§ 155.20 to exclude those individuals
seeking eligibility for an exemption
pursuant to subpart G, we otherwise
maintained the definition from the
Exchange final rule regarding the
coverage application process at 77 FR
18445 with a few minor technical
corrections. Further, we note that
comments regarding eligibility for
enrollment in a QHP and insurance
affordability programs are beyond the
scope of this regulation. Since the
relevant family unit for the individual
shared responsibility provision is the
tax filing unit, our proposed language
defining ‘‘application filer’’ at
§ 155.600(a) specific to subpart G crossreferences section 5000A(a) of the Code
regarding the individual shared
responsibility provision. Because the
individual shared responsibility
provision will be administered by the
Internal Revenue Service on a taxreturn-by-tax-return basis, we believe it
is appropriate to provide that only
members of the same tax filing unit may
file an exemption application together.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions
proposed in § 155.20 of the proposed
rule with a few technical corrections.
We clarify that the term ‘‘applicant’’ in
this provision excludes those
individuals seeking eligibility for an
exemption from the individual shared
responsibility payment pursuant to
subpart G. We also clarify that our
previous inclusion of an authorized
representative in the definition refers to
the authorized representative of an
applicant. We also cite to the applicable
Treasury regulation instead of section
36B of the Code.
2. Subpart C—General Functions of an
Exchange
a. Functions of an Exchange (§ 155.200)
In paragraph (a), we proposed to add
that the Exchange would also perform
the minimum functions described in
subpart G of this part related to
eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
Comment: Commenters generally
supported our proposal that the
Exchange would also perform the
minimum functions described in
subpart G of this part related to
eligibility determinations for
exemptions. Some commenters raised
concerns that the HHS proposed rule
and the Treasury proposed rule
discussed different issues, and wanted
to ensure that both agencies were
working in close coordination. Other
commenters expressed opposition to
Exchanges determining eligibility for
exemptions based on overarching
philosophical complaints regarding this
proposed rule and this provision of the
Affordable Care Act. One commenter
wanted HHS to reduce the number of
exemptions available to individuals.
Lastly, another commenter believed that
HHS was providing too much latitude to
states in determining the basic
framework for Exchanges, and rather
should set more strict guidelines to
prevent confusion for Exchanges and
consumers.
Response: We continue to coordinate
closely with the Department of Treasury
and a range of stakeholders to ensure
that we provide sufficient guidance to
Exchanges, while also ensuring the
appropriate level of operational
flexibility to allow for effective
implementation. We note that the
categories of exemptions proposed were
based on the definitions provided
within the Affordable Care Act, which
added section 5000A of the Code. As we
discuss further below, the Secretary of
HHS has exercised careful discretion in
specifying criteria for the hardship
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39497
exemption in accordance with section
5000A(e)(5) of the Code, to ensure that
a hardship exemption is only available
in limited circumstances in which an
individual has suffered a hardship with
respect to the capability to obtain
coverage under a QHP.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provision
proposed in § 155.200 of the proposed
rule without modification.
3. Subpart G—Exchange Functions in
the Individual Market: Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions
a. Definitions and General Requirements
(§ 155.600)
In paragraph (a) of § 155.600, we
proposed definitions and sought
comments for terms that apply
throughout subpart G. First, we
proposed to define ‘‘applicant’’ as an
individual who is seeking an exemption
from the individual shared
responsibility payment for him or
herself through an application
submitted to the Exchange. We
proposed to define ‘‘application filer’’ as
an applicant; an individual who is liable
for the individual shared responsibility
payment (in accordance with 26 CFR
1.5000A–1(c) of the Treasury proposed
rule) for an applicant; an authorized
representative; or if the applicant is a
minor or incapacitated, someone acting
responsibly for an applicant. We noted
that we intended to modify the
proposed language in § 155.227 (78 FR
4711) and § 155.225 (78 FR 4710) to
clarify that authorized representatives
and certified application counselors can
assist individuals seeking exemptions,
and sought comments about how
authorized representatives and certified
application counselors could best
support individuals seeking certificates
of exemption from the Exchange.
We proposed to define ‘‘exemption’’
as an exemption from the individual
shared responsibility payment, noting
that there is no meaningful distinction
between individuals exempt from the
shared responsibility payment and
individuals who are not ‘‘applicable
individuals’’ for purposes of the
requirement to maintain minimum
essential coverage in section 5000A of
the Code.
We proposed to define ‘‘health care
sharing ministry’’ in the same manner as
provided in 26 CFR 1.5000A–3(b) of the
Treasury proposed rule.
We proposed to define ‘‘required
contribution’’ in the same manner as
provided in 26 CFR 1.5000A–3(e) of the
Treasury proposed rule.
We proposed to define ‘‘Indian tribe’’
in the same manner as in 26 CFR
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
39498
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
1.5000A–3(g) of the Treasury proposed
rule, which in turn references the
definition in section 45A(c)(6) of the
Code.
In paragraph (b), we proposed that for
purposes of this subpart, any attestation
that an applicant is to provide under
this subpart may also be provided by an
application filer on behalf of the
applicant.
In paragraph (c) of § 155.600, we
proposed that for the purposes of this
subpart, the Exchange must consider
information through electronic data
sources, other information provided by
the applicant, or other information as
available in the records of the Exchange
to be reasonably compatible with an
applicant’s attestation if the difference
or discrepancy does not impact the
eligibility for the relevant exemption or
exemptions for which the applicant
requested.
We also proposed to add paragraphs
(d) and (e) in order to specify that the
accessibility and notice requirements in
§ 155.205(c) and § 155.230, respectively,
apply to exemptions as well, given that
the definition of applicant in this
subpart is otherwise specific to
exemptions.
Comment: One commenter raised
concerns about health care sharing
ministries. The commenter noted that
health care sharing ministries are not
subject to state insurance laws, and as
such, the statutory exemption for
members of health care sharing
ministries may create circumstances in
which an individual who is a member
of a health care sharing ministry does
not benefit from the Affordable Care
Act’s broader consumer protections. The
commenter believed that this might
motivate organizations to seek to
establish standing as a health care
sharing ministry in order to evade
consumer protections and market
reforms enacted by the Affordable Care
Act. The commenter advised HHS and
IRS to carefully monitor applications
from entities seeking recognition as a
health care sharing ministry for the
purpose of exemptions.
Response: The Affordable Care Act
defines health care sharing ministry for
purposes of an exemption in section
5000A(d)(2)(B) of the Code. We
appreciate the concerns raised regarding
organizations that may improperly seek
standing as a health care sharing
ministry. As we discuss further below,
we believe that the process discussed in
§ 155.615(c) will ensure that HHS only
provides exemptions based on
membership in a health care sharing
ministry for individuals who are
members of health care sharing
ministries that meet the standards in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
statute, which specify that a health care
sharing ministry or its predecessor must
have been in existence at all times since
December 31, 1999.
Comment: Commenters generally
supported allowing an application filer
to attest for an applicant on the
exemptions application. However, one
commenter believed that ‘‘attestation’’
was not defined clearly enough in
§ 155.600(b), and as such recommended
that HHS revise this provision to more
clearly specific the acceptable form and
manner of an attestation.
Response: The proposed language
regarding attestations in § 155.600(b)
mirrors the language in 45 CFR
155.300(c), which is used in the
coverage process. As we believe this
definition provides sufficient flexibility
and clarity for Exchanges, we do not
deviate from the language used in the
coverage process to describe an
attestation.
Comment: Several commenters
requested that HHS ensure that the
application process, including eligibility
notices, be accessible to individuals
with limited English proficiency (LEP)
as well as those individuals with
disabilities. Commenters also urged
HHS to include clearer guidelines
regarding the exemption eligibility
process in order to ensure that the
processes do not discriminate against
individuals, particularly LEP
individuals. Commenters requested
translation of the requisite materials in
non-English languages, and suggested
that HHS refer to LEP guidance adopted
by the HHS Office of Civil Rights.
Response: We appreciate commenters’
concerns regarding ensuring that the
application process and eligibility
notices are accessible to individuals
with LEP as well as those individuals
with disabilities. In proposed
§ 155.600(d) and (e), we crossreferenced § 155.205(c) and § 155.230
respectively, which provide standards
to ensure the suggested protections are
in place. As such, we do not believe that
additional standards are necessary in
subpart G to ensure the application
process and eligibility notices are
accessible to individuals with LEP as
well as those individuals with
disabilities.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We finalize the provisions proposed
in § 155.600 of the proposed rule with
one modification and a few nonsubstantive technical corrections for
clarity. We finalize the definition of
‘‘Indian tribe’’ as proposed, but move
the definition earlier in paragraph (a).
We make a technical correction for the
purpose of clarity in finalizing the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
definition of ‘‘shared responsibility
payment’’ to specify that it means the
payment imposed with respect to a nonexempt individual. We also include the
definition of ‘‘tax filer’’ in paragraph (a)
to specify that it has the same meaning
in subpart G as it does in § 155.300(a).
b. Eligibility Standards for Exemptions
(§ 155.605)
Under the program established in
accordance with section 1411(a)(4) of
the Affordable Care Act for determining
whether certificates of exemption are to
be issued by Exchanges under section
1311(d)(4)(H) of the Affordable Care
Act, we proposed that Exchanges would
issue certificates of exemption in the
categories of religious conscience and
hardship. With respect to the other
seven exemptions, for reasons set forth
below, we proposed that under the
program provided for in section
1411(a)(4) of the Affordable Care Act,
Exchanges would also issue certificates
of exemption with respect to three
additional categories (with exemptions
also available through the tax filing
process) based on membership in a
health care sharing ministry,
membership in an Indian tribe, and
incarceration. In the four remaining
exemption categories, however, we
proposed that under the program
established under section 1411(a)(4) of
the Affordable Care Act, certificates
would not be issued by Exchanges
under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the
Affordable Care Act, and instead
individuals would claim an exemption
in one of those categories exclusively
through the tax return filing process
with the IRS.
In paragraph (a) of § 155.605, we
proposed that except as specified in
paragraph (g), the Exchange would
determine an applicant eligible for and
grant a certificate of exemption for a
month if the Exchange determines that
he or she meets the requirements for one
of the categories of exemptions
described in this section for at least one
day in the month, consistent with 26
CFR 1.5000A–3 of the Treasury
proposed rule. We noted that depending
on the circumstances for each specific
proposed hardship exemption category,
the certificate may be provided for an
entire calendar year or instead for a
specific month or period of months,
including periods of time that stretch
across more than one calendar year.
We noted that an applicant could
apply for multiple exemptions
simultaneously in case some are denied,
and also receive any exemptions for
which he or she is eligible. We solicited
comments on this approach.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
In paragraph (b), we proposed that
except as specified, an applicant is
required to submit a new application for
each year for which an applicant wants
to be considered for an exemption
through the Exchange, and that an
exemption will only be provided for a
calendar year in which the applicant
submitted an application for an
exemption. We provided exceptions for
exemptions provided based on
membership in an Indian tribe and for
religious conscience, in recognition that
an individual’s qualification for these
exemptions is expected to remain the
same from year to year. We also
specified an exception for hardship,
since some categories of hardship will
be provided for one or more months and
may be provided for periods of time that
stretch across more than one calendar
year, and some categories of hardship
can only be provided after the close of
a calendar year. We welcomed
comments on this approach and how
the Exchange could expedite and
streamline the process.
We considered whether to specify that
the Exchange send a notice to each
individual who had an exemption
certificate from the Exchange for a
calendar year, in order to remind him or
her about the opportunity to apply to for
an exemption for the following calendar
year, and whether this notice could be
sent only at the individual’s direction.
We solicited comments regarding the
use of such a reminder and on a renewal
process more generally.
In paragraph (c), we proposed to
codify the statutory eligibility standards
for the exemption based on religious
conscience. In paragraph (c)(1), we
proposed that the Exchange would
determine an applicant eligible for an
exemption for a month if he or she is a
member of a recognized religious sect or
division described in section 1402(g)(1)
of the Code, and an adherent of
established tenets or teachings of such
sect or division for such month, in
accordance with 26 CFR 1.5000A–3(a)
of the Treasury proposed rule.
In paragraph (c)(2), we proposed
eligibility standards regarding the
duration of the exemption for religious
conscience. In paragraph (c)(2)(i), we
proposed that the Exchange grant the
exemption for religious conscience to an
applicant that meets the standards of
paragraph (c)(1) of this section for a
month on a continuing basis, until such
time that the applicant either reaches
the age of 18, or reports that he or she
no longer meets the standards provided
in (c)(1) of this section.
We proposed to add paragraph
(c)(2)(ii) to specify how the Exchange
should handle a situation in which an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
individual who has a certificate of
exemption based on religious
conscience that was granted prior to the
individual reaching the age of 18. We
proposed that the Exchange send such
an individual a notice when he or she
reaches the age of 18 that informs the
individual that he or she needs to
submit a new exemption application if
he or she would like to maintain the
certificate of exemption.
We proposed to add paragraph (c)(3)
to specify that the Exchange will grant
an exemption in this category
prospectively or retrospectively.
In paragraph (d), we proposed that the
Exchange determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption for a month if
the applicant is a member of a health
care sharing ministry for such month in
accordance with 26 CFR 1.5000A–3(b)
of the Treasury proposed rule. We
proposed that an applicant who wanted
to retain this exemption for an
additional calendar year would re-apply
for this exemption each calendar year,
and that the Exchange may only provide
an exemption in this category
retrospectively.
In paragraph (e), we proposed the
eligibility standards for the exemption
based on incarceration. We specified
that the Exchange would determine an
individual eligible for an exemption for
a month that he or she meets the
definition specified in 26 CFR 1.5000A–
3(d) of the Treasury proposed rule. We
proposed that the Exchange would only
provide this exemption for months in
which an individual was incarcerated,
since there is no assurance that an
incarcerated individual will be released
on the expected date.
In paragraph (f), we proposed
eligibility standards for the exemption
based on membership in an Indian tribe.
In paragraph (f)(1), we proposed to
codify that the Exchange would
determine an applicant eligible for an
exemption for a month if he or she is a
member of an Indian tribe for such
month, in accordance with 26 CFR
1.5000A–3(g) of the Treasury proposed
rule.
In paragraph (f)(2), we proposed
eligibility standards regarding the
duration of the exemption for
membership in an Indian tribe, such
that the Exchange would grant the
exemption for membership in an Indian
tribe to an applicant who meets the
standards of paragraph (f)(1) of this
section for a month on a continuing
basis, until such time that the
individual reports that he or she no
longer meets the standards provided in
(f)(1) of this section.
We proposed to add paragraph (f)(3)
to specify that the Exchange will grant
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39499
an exemption in this category during the
year prospectively or retrospectively.
In paragraph (g), we proposed
eligibility standards for the exemption
based on hardship, which is defined in
section 5000A(e)(5) of the Code as
applying to ‘‘any applicable individual
who for any month is determined by the
Secretary under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of
the Affordable Care Act to have suffered
a hardship with respect to the capability
to obtain coverage under a qualified
health plan.’’ In developing some of
these standards, we considered the
standards established by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We
proposed some specific time standards
for each category of hardship, but we
solicited comments regarding whether
these are appropriate, or if we should
adopt a more uniform approach across
the category.
In paragraph (g)(1) of § 155.605, we
proposed that the Exchange provide an
exemption for hardship for a month or
months in which an applicant
experienced financial or domestic
circumstances, including an unexpected
natural or human-caused event, such
that he or she has a significant,
unexpected increase in essential
expenses; the expense of purchasing
minimum essential coverage would
have caused him or her to experience
serious deprivation of food, shelter,
clothing or other necessities; or he or
she has experienced other factors
similar to those described in paragraphs
(g)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section that
prevented him or her from obtaining
minimum essential coverage. We
proposed broad language to include a
range of personal scenarios that could
negatively impact an applicant such that
he or she would be eligible for this
exemption, and noted that we expected
to clarify these criteria in future
guidance. We listed expected standards
and solicited comments on these
criteria, including on whether
additional criteria should be established
in regulation or guidance. We also
solicited comments regarding whether
the proposed time standard could be
effectively implemented, or whether we
should take a different approach.
In paragraph (g)(2), we proposed that
the Exchange provide an exemption for
hardship for a calendar year if an
applicant, or another individual for
whom the applicant attests will be
included in the applicant’s family (as
defined in 26 CFR 1.5000A–1(d)(6) of
the Treasury proposed rule), is unable to
afford coverage for such calendar year in
accordance with 26 CFR 1.5000A–3(e)
of the Treasury proposed rule,
calculated using projected annual
household income. We proposed
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
39500
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
identical standards to those defined for
the lack of affordable coverage
exemption in 26 CFR 1.5000A–3(e) of
the Treasury proposed rule, except that
the Exchange would use projected
household income to determine whether
coverage is affordable under this
exemption, instead of actual household
income from the tax return for the year
for which the exemption is requested.
We solicited comments regarding
whether the approach in paragraph
(g)(5) of this section regarding the
aggregate cost of employer-sponsored
coverage for all the employed members
of the family should also be applied in
determining eligibility for this hardship
category.
We proposed that this exemption is
not available for an application that is
submitted after the last date on which
an applicant could enroll in a QHP
through the Exchange for a calendar
year for which the exemption is
requested to ensure that an applicant
can obtain the information needed to
make a purchasing decision, including
for a catastrophic plan, which is not
applicable after the last date on which
enrollment would be possible.
We proposed in paragraph (g)(3) of
§ 155.605 that the Exchange provide an
exemption for hardship for a calendar
year if an individual taxpayer who was
not required to file an income tax return
for such calendar year because his or
her gross income was below the filing
threshold, but who nevertheless filed to
receive a tax benefit, claimed a
dependent who was required to file a
tax return, and as a result had
household income exceeding the
applicable return filing threshold
outlined in 26 CFR 1.5000A–3(f)(2) of
the Treasury proposed rule.
We proposed to add paragraph (g)(4)
to specify that the Exchange provide an
exemption for hardship for a calendar
year for an individual who has been
determined ineligible for Medicaid for
one or more months during the benefit
year solely as a result of a State not
implementing section 2001(a) of the
Affordable Care Act. We sought
comments on whether this exemption
should be limited to such individuals
who are also not eligible for advance
payments of the premium tax credit
(that is, with projected household
income below 100% of the poverty
threshold).
We proposed to add paragraph (g)(5)
of § 155.605 to specify that the Exchange
provide an exemption for hardship for
a calendar year if an applicant and one
or more employed members of his or her
family, as defined in 26 CFR 1.5000A–
1(d)(6) of the Treasury proposed rule,
are each determined eligible for self-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
only coverage in separate eligible
employer-sponsored plans that are
affordable, pursuant to 26 CFR
1.5000A–3(e) of the Treasury proposed
rule for one or more months during the
calendar year, but for whom the
aggregate cost of employer-sponsored
coverage for all the employed members
of the family exceeds 8 percent of the
household income for that month or
those months.
Lastly, as noted above, we proposed
under our authority in section
1411(d)(4) of the Affordable Care Act
that the Exchange would not issue
certifications of exemption with respect
to household income below the filing
threshold (other than the limited
hardship exemption proposed in
§ 155.605(g)(3) and described above);
not being lawfully present; short
coverage gaps; and inability to afford
coverage (other than the limited
hardship exemption proposed in
§ 155.605(g)(2) and described above).
We specified that these exemptions
would be available solely through the
tax filing process. We solicited
comments on this approach and if there
were alternative approaches that HHS
should consider.
Comment: Multiple commenters
expressed support for HHS’ proposal to
allow an individual to apply for and
enable the Exchange to grant multiple
exemptions, as well as the provision
specifying that an individual eligible for
an exemption for at least one day of the
month receive the exemption for a full
month. Another commenter expressed
broad support for the proposed
exemptions process, but wanted HHS to
maintain its focus on ensuring
individuals receive coverage through
the Exchange.
Response: In fulfilling the goals of the
Affordable Care Act, we are committed
to ensuring that all individuals have
access to quality, affordable health
coverage. Furthermore, as specified in
the statute, we are also committed to
providing access to exemptions from the
shared responsibility payment to those
individuals who meet specified
standards.
Comment: Commenters expressed
differing opinions regarding whether the
Exchange should send notices to
individuals in possession of certain
certificates of exemption at the end of a
calendar year to remind them of the
need to submit an application for the
same exemption for the next calendar
year. Several commenters wanted HHS
to specify that the Exchange send such
a reminder notice that would arrive
during open enrollment, to allow an
individual to make the appropriate
purchasing decision. Another
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
commenter opposed specifying that the
Exchange send such a reminder notice,
noting that most exemptions are meant
to be temporary, and that the primary
goal of the Exchange should be ensuring
that individuals have access to coverage.
Response: We will maintain the
language as proposed, which does not
specify that Exchanges will send an
additional reminder notice to an
individual at the end of a calendar year.
Pursuant to the eligibility standards for
exemptions described throughout
§ 155.605, individuals have broad
flexibility in terms of the time periods
which Exchanges will grant exemptions,
and thus we do not believe the
corresponding administrative burden on
Exchanges to send an additional notice
is outweighed by the benefits of such a
notice for individuals. We note that an
Exchange also has the flexibility to send
such a notice at its discretion.
Comment: Several commenters raised
concerns regarding our proposed
codification of the eligibility standards
for the religious conscience exemption
specified in the Affordable Care Act.
Some commenters expressed
philosophical opposition to the notion
that the government would exempt
individuals for religious purposes.
Other commenters opposed our
proposal to allow children of
individuals in recognized religious sects
or divisions to be exempt in addition to
their parents. Commenters believed that
as a result, parents would not have to
maintain minimum essential coverage
for their dependent children, which
they feared would permit parents to
avoid caring for their children’s health.
Response: Section 5000A(d)(2) of the
Code, as added by section 1501(b) of the
Affordable Care Act, establishes the
religious conscience exemption. We
note that state laws governing domestic
relations allow parents to attest on
behalf of minor children, which was the
basis of our proposal. We note that we
do not intend this provision to modify
or supersede any other laws regarding
health responsibility for children.
Comment: One commenter suggested
the IRS or the Social Security
Administration (SSA) is better
positioned to determine eligibility for
the religious conscience exemption.
Furthermore, the commenter expressed
concerns about how the Exchange
should handle an appeal when a
religious sect is not recognized by the
SSA. The commenter indicated that it
would be more appropriate for an
individual to instead appeal to IRS or
SSA in this situation as opposed to the
Exchange.
Response: As noted above, the statute
specifies that the religious conscience
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
exemption may only be granted by the
Exchange. We are working closely with
the SSA to define an appropriate
process to address religious sects that
are not yet recognized, and we clarify in
§ 155.615(b)(4) that if an applicant
attests to membership in a religious sect
or division that is not recognized by the
Social Security Administration as an
approved religious sect or division
under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, the
Exchange must provide the applicant
with information regarding how his or
her religious sect or division can pursue
recognition under section 1402(g)(1) of
the Code, and determine the applicant
ineligible for this exemption until such
time as the Exchange obtains
information indicating that the religious
sect or division has been approved. We
agree with the commenter that the
Exchange is not an ideal venue for an
appeal of a denial that was based on a
finding that a sect or division did not
meet the statutory requirements. We
intend to provide further guidance on
this process in collaboration with the
SSA.
Comment: One commenter requested
that HHS expand the religious sects and
divisions whose members qualify for the
religious conscience exemption.
Response: HHS does not have the
authority to expand the criteria set in
the statute, which reference section
1402(g)(1) of the Code, and so we are
finalizing the cross-reference to the
statutory criteria as proposed.
Comment: Commenters expressed
differing opinions regarding our
proposal that when an individual who
has a religious conscience exemption
turns 18, he or she must re-apply for the
exemption in order to maintain it. One
commenter opposed specifying that the
Exchange send a notice, instead arguing
that the individual turning 18 should be
responsible for reapplying without a
prompt. Another commenter noted that
based on the practices of the religious
sects and divisions that this exemption
covers, HHS should modify this
provision such that the age standard is
21.
Response: In response to comments,
to align with other Affordable Care Act
definitions of children, and to reduce
burden on individuals under the age of
21, we are modifying this provision in
the final rule to specify that individuals
receiving the religious conscience
exemption will have to re-apply for the
exemption upon turning 21. We will
maintain the provision specifying that
the Exchange send a notice prompting
an individual to reapply upon turning
21, since this notice is needed to notify
him or her that his or her exemption
will end absent a new application.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Nothing precludes individuals affected
by this change from obtaining coverage
on their own.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the Exchange should have the
flexibility not to grant exemptions based
on membership in a health care sharing
ministry or incarceration. The
commenter noted the limited benefit for
individuals in having an Exchange grant
such exemptions since the proposed
rule specifies that they are only
available through the Exchange
retrospectively within a calendar year,
and are otherwise available through the
tax filing process.
Response: We believe that individuals
will benefit from the opportunity to
receive the exemptions based on
membership in a health care sharing
ministry or incarceration through the
Exchange in addition to through the tax
filing process, and as such, are
finalizing the provision as proposed.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that HHS clarify the language used in
§ 155.605(c)(3) and (f)(3) such that the
text of the regulation appropriately
describe the flexibility for Exchanges to
grant an exemption in these categories
retrospectively or prospectively.
Response: In proposed § 155.605(c)(3)
and (f)(3), we specified that the
Exchange ‘‘must provide an exemption
in this category prospectively or
retrospectively.’’ The intent of this
provision was not to allow flexibility to
the Exchange whether or not to grant the
exemption but, rather, to specify that
the Exchange will provide an exemption
in these categories retrospectively,
prospectively, or both, depending on the
period of time for which such an
exemption is requested and the period
of time for which an applicant meets the
criteria for such an exemption.
Accordingly, we have modified the
language in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), (f),
and (g) to specify as appropriate when
the Exchange must make the various
categories of exemptions available
prospectively or retrospectively.
Comment: One commenter expressed
support for HHS’ proposal that the
Exchange grant the exemption based on
membership in an Indian tribe as long
as individuals still maintained the
opportunity to file for this exemption
through the tax filing process. Another
commenter suggested that Exchanges
should not grant exemptions based on
membership in an Indian tribe, but that
rather such exemption should only be
available through the tax filing process.
Alternatively, this commenter said that
if the Exchange does grant this
exemption, it should only do so
prospectively.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39501
Response: We believe that individuals
will benefit from the opportunity to
receive the exemption based on
membership in an Indian tribe through
the Exchange in addition to through the
tax filing process. Furthermore, we do
not believe that granting this
retrospectively and prospectively will
result in significant burden for the
Exchange, since no work is necessary to
determine eligibility for this exemption
retrospectively beyond what would be
necessary to determine eligibility for it
prospectively. Accordingly, we are
finalizing this provision as proposed.
Comment: Some commenters
expressed concerns about the definition
of Indian tribe proposed in § 155.600(a),
which referred to section 45A(c)(6) of
the Code. These commenters
recommended a broader definition of
Indian for purposes of an exemption.
Several commenters recommended that
HHS add a hardship exemption category
for Indians as defined in 42 CFR 447.50,
and another commenter suggested that
Exchanges add a hardship exemption
category for individuals who are eligible
to receive services provided by the
Indian Health Service (IHS) pursuant to
25 U.S.C. 1680c(a) or (b). A commenter
asked HHS to specify that the duration
for these hardship exemptions would
parallel the duration of the exemption
for a member of an Indian tribe.
Response: We have thoroughly
reviewed the definitions of the term
‘‘Indian’’ in the Affordable Care Act.
HHS does not have the legal authority
to modify through regulation the
statutory definitions of ‘‘Indian’’ as
referenced in the Affordable Care Act.
There is no administrative flexibility to
align these definitions. Any changes to
the definition must be legislative. In
response to comments, we added a
category of hardship exemption in
§ 155.605(g)(6) for an individual who is
not a member of a federally-recognized
tribe, and is an Indian eligible for
services through an Indian health care
provider, as defined in 42 CFR 447.50,
or an individual eligible for services
through IHS in accordance with 25
U.S.C. 1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3). We also
redesignate proposed § 155.615(f)(3) as
§ 155.615(f)(4), and add new § 155.615
to specify that the Exchange will use the
same verification procedures for this
exemption as it will use for the
exemption for members of a federallyrecognized tribe. We also note that the
duration of this exemption mirrors that
as provided for members of federallyrecognized tribes, such that whether it
is granted prospectively or
retrospectively, it is granted for a month
on a continuing basis until the
individuals specified above report a
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
39502
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
change in their eligibility status for this
exemption. This ensures that the
individuals specified above who have
access to health care through the IHS,
Tribes and Tribal organizations, and
urban Indian organizations (I/T/U) are
treated in the same manner as members
of federally-recognized tribes for
purposes of the individual shared
responsibility payment.
Comment: Multiple commenters
expressed overall support for our
proposal in § 155.605(g)(1), whereby the
Exchange would determine an
individual eligible for a hardship
exemption based on circumstances that
resulted in an unexpected increase in
essential expenses that prevented an
individual from obtaining coverage
under a qualified health plan. One
commenter suggested that HHS should
provide further flexibility to allow
Exchanges to define additional
eligibility criteria for this exemption.
Another commenter expressed support
for HHS providing minimum standards
for hardship. While we mentioned
several examples of events that would
qualify as hardships in preamble, based
on standards used for similar purposes
in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
some commenters wanted HHS to
clarify in the final text of the regulation
that an applicant who met the
circumstances discussed in the
preamble as well as other circumstances
used in Massachusetts but not
specifically mentioned in preamble
would qualify for a hardship exemption.
Response: In preamble to the
proposed rule, we noted that we
expected to clarify detailed hardship
criteria in future guidance. Accordingly,
to assist Exchanges in determining
eligibility for a hardship exemption for
an individual who experienced
circumstances that prevented him or her
from obtaining coverage under a QHP,
we are publishing guidance
simultaneously with this rule that
provides detailed criteria for this
exemption.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that Exchanges have
greater flexibility in determining the
duration of a single exemption,
particularly due to the many
circumstances that could be covered by
the hardship exemption. Several
commenters recommended that HHS
provide Exchanges with clearer
guidance regarding the duration of
hardship exemptions that could be
granted according to § 155.605(g)(1),
including events that may span multiple
calendar years. Some commenters urged
that in particular situations, such as
those where victims suffer natural and
human-caused disasters, Exchanges
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
should grant exemptions that last 2
years. Other commenters suggested that
any hardship exemption be provided for
a minimum of 6 months or a year. One
commenter recommended that the
Exchange grant a hardship exemption
for more than a calendar year if an
individual experiences an event that
occurs across 2-calendar years. Another
commenter requested clarification
regarding the language in § 155.605(a)
specifying that the Exchange would
provide an exemption for a month if the
Exchange determines that an individual
meets the requirements for an
exemption for at least one day of the
month, with the exception of
§ 155.605(g).
Response: In response to comments,
we clarify that a hardship exemption
granted under § 155.605(g)(1) will at
minimum be provided for the month
before the hardship, the month or
months of the hardship, and the month
after the hardship, and that Exchanges
have flexibility to provide it for
additional months after the hardship,
consistent with the circumstances of the
hardship. This ensures that such a
hardship exemption addresses the time
period where an individual actually
experienced the hardship, while also
providing flexibility for Exchanges to
evaluate the particular circumstances of
an event that may necessitate an
extended duration of an exemption. As
such, the hardship exemptions provided
under § 155.605(g)(1), which will be
provided before and after the occurrence
of when the individual actually
experienced the hardship, necessitate an
exception in regards to the general
provision of § 155.605(a).
Comment: Numerous commenters
urged HHS to specify additional
categories of hardship exemptions
outside of those proposed or to expand
the scope of certain categories of
hardship exemptions as proposed.
These suggestions include providing
hardship exemptions for: Employees
who have an offer of self-only employersponsored coverage that costs less than
8 percent of household income, but for
whom family coverage costs more than
8 percent of household income;
individuals with income less than 150
percent of the FPL; individuals for
whom the aggregate cost of employersponsored coverage (not only employed
members) exceeds 8 percent of
household income for that month(s);
individuals and families with
household income below 250 percent of
the FPL that are offered affordable
employer-sponsored coverage (less than
8 percent of household income), but the
amount that the individual or family
would have to pay for the lowest-cost
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
bronze plan on the Exchange exceeds 8
percent of household income;
individuals and their dependents who
have an offer of employer-sponsored
coverage that is affordable but that does
not provide minimum value;
individuals participating in special nonminimum essential coverage programs
that already require financial
determinations by a state; individuals
who already receive certain kinds of
public assistance benefits; or
individuals who in good faith attempted
to purchase insurance but were unable
to do so based on limited enrollment
opportunities.
Response: As specified in guidance
published simultaneously with this
final rule, we have identified several
events that Exchanges can refer to in
order to help them in determining
eligibility for hardship exemptions.
These will also be the detailed criteria
used by the Federally-facilitated
Exchange. Due to the broad range of
circumstances that will qualify an
individual for a hardship exemption, we
do not believe that further categories of
exemptions need to be added to the text
of the regulation. However, as discussed
further below, we have modified the
eligibility standards for the hardship
exemption for situations in which
coverage is unaffordable based on
projected income such that if an
individual and his or her dependents
have an offer of employer-sponsored
coverage that does not meet the
minimum value standard, the Exchange
will not consider this offer in
determining affordability. Rather, in
such a situation, the Exchange will
consider affordability based on the
lowest-cost offer of employer-sponsored
coverage that does meet the minimum
value standard, and if no such offer
exists, on the cost of the applicable
lowest cost bronze plan in the relevant
rating area of the Exchange, reduced by
any available advance payments of the
premium tax credit. This is similar to
the considerations for eligibility for
advance payments of the premium tax
credit based on eligibility for coverage
in an eligible employer-sponsored plan,
which take into account both cost and
minimum value.
Comment: One commenter expressed
concerns about the burden on
Exchanges to handle eligibility
determinations for exemptions,
including the hardship exemption, as
they viewed the eligibility
determination process for exemptions as
more appropriately handled through the
tax filing process, particularly when
exemptions are not available
prospectively through the Exchange.
Some commenters supported the
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
proposed hardship exemption at
§ 155.605(g)(3) (related to the tax filing
threshold), while another commenter
stated that the proposed hardship
exemption at § 155.605(g)(3) should not
be granted by the Exchange as it
concerned tax filing. Other commenters
generally supported the hardship
exemption proposed at § 155.605(g)(5)
(related to affordable self-only
coverage), even if suggesting
modifications as noted above, for
employed members determined eligible
for affordable self-only insurance, but
for whom the aggregate cost of
employer-sponsored coverage for all the
employed members of the family
exceeds 8 percent of household income.
Response: Based on comments
received, and in order to minimize
burden on Exchanges while ensuring
efficient processing of exemptions
applications, we will modify
§ 155.605(g) such that the hardship
exemptions proposed at § 155.605(g)(3)
and (5) will be provided exclusively
through the tax filing process, and not
by the Exchange. These exemptions
necessitate information that will only be
available at the time of tax filing, such
that if they were exclusively available
through the Exchange, an individual
would need to file a tax return, request
an exemption from the Exchange,
receive a determination from the
Exchange, and depending on the
determination, potentially amend his or
her return. Accordingly, to streamline
the process for consumers, we grant
limited authority to the IRS to
administer these two hardship
exemptions. We note that we will
continue to consider the administrative
feasibility of Exchanges granting the
hardship exemption under
§ 155.605(g)(5) after the conclusion of
the first year of operations.
Comment: Commenters expressed
broad support for our proposal at
§ 155.605(g)(4) to provide a hardship
exemption for individuals ineligible for
Medicaid in states that chose not to
expand Medicaid under the Affordable
Care Act, but expressed differing
opinions regarding whether such a
hardship exemption should be limited
to those individuals who are not
determined eligible for advance
payments of the premium tax credit.
Some commenters supported the policy
as proposed based on affordability
concerns even for those individuals
eligible for advance payments of the
premium tax credit, while others
suggested that the individuals who are
eligible for advance payments of the
premium tax credit should not be
eligible to receive a hardship
exemption.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Response: We appreciate the concerns
raised by commenters arguing both for
and against maintaining this hardship
exemption as proposed. We continue to
believe that it is appropriate that
individuals, even those eligible for
advance payments of the premium tax
credit, to be eligible for this hardship
exemption if ineligible for Medicaid
solely as a result of a state that chose not
to expand Medicaid eligibility under the
Affordable Care Act. We expect that
these exemptions will be provided
through the eligibility process for
coverage, and note that notwithstanding
receiving a hardship exemption, such
individuals may still decide to enroll in
a QHP and receive advance payments of
the premium tax credit in this situation.
We also note that these exemptions will
be available retrospectively following
the close of a coverage year.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed general support for
§ 155.605(g)(2), which provides a
hardship exemption based on projected
annual household income. However,
some commenters believed that this still
did not fully address the consequences
of 26 CFR 1.36B–2(c)(3)(v)(A)(2)
concerning the affordability of an
eligible employer-sponsored plan for a
related individual. One commenter
requested clarification as to whether
this hardship exemption applied to the
individual or the entire tax filing unit.
Another commenter did not support
limiting the availability of this hardship
exemption only within open enrollment
periods.
Response: We note that while the lack
of affordable coverage based on
projected income hardship exemption
and the lack of affordable coverage
exemption described in section
5000A(e)(1) of the Code address certain
situations where a related individual is
ineligible for advance payments of the
premium tax credit based on 26 CFR
1.36B–2(c)(3)(v)(A)(2), these provisions
are not intended to provide an
exemption in all cases in which an
individual may be ineligible for advance
payments of the premium tax credit.
We finalize this exemption to
generally follow the standards in section
5000A(e)(1) of the Code. As in the
proposed rule, we specify in paragraph
(g)(2)(i) of the final rule that this
exemption differs from the exemption
described in section 5000A(e)(1) of the
Code in that it relies on projected
household income. In order to facilitate
implementation of this exemption, we
add paragraphs (g)(2)(ii), (iii), and (iv) to
clarify the applicable standards. First, in
paragraph (g)(2)(ii), we clarify that as
described above, the Exchange will only
consider the affordability of an eligible
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39503
employer-sponsored plan for this
exemption if it meets the minimum
value standard. Second, in paragraph
(g)(2)(iii), we describe how the
Exchange will determine the cost of
coverage for an individual who is
eligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan.
We note that, under the Treasury
proposed rule, the standards for
determining the required contribution
for coverage through an eligible
employer-sponsored plan vary
depending on whether an individual is
an employee eligible to purchase
coverage under an eligible employersponsored plan through the employee’s
employer, or is eligible to purchase
coverage under an eligible employersponsored plan because of a
relationship to an employee, with
respect to eligibility for an exemption.
For an individual employee who is
eligible through his or her own
employer, the affordability calculation
is based on the lowest cost option for
self-only coverage. For all other
individuals eligible to purchase
coverage under an eligible employersponsored plan, the required
contribution is the portion of the annual
premium that the employee would pay
for the lowest cost option for family
coverage that would cover the employee
and all individuals who are included in
the employee’s family and are not
otherwise exempt. We note that the
Exchange will only know whether an
individual within the employee’s family
has been granted an exemption by that
Exchange. Accordingly, we specify in
paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(C) that the
Exchange will consider the lowest cost
family coverage that meets the
minimum value standard and would
cover the employee and all other
individuals who are included in the
employee’s family who have not
otherwise been granted an exemption
through the Exchange.
We also note that proposed 26 CFR
1.36B–2(c)(3)(v)(A)(4) (78 FR 25914),
provides that for purposes of
determining eligibility for the premium
tax credit, the affordability of coverage
in an eligible employer-sponsored plan
is determined by assuming that each
employee satisfies the requirements of
available nondiscriminatory wellness
programs related to tobacco use, and
does not satisfy the requirements of any
available wellness programs that are not
related to tobacco use. That is, if a plan
includes a nondiscriminatory wellness
program for tobacco users, such as
smoking cessation classes, the
affordability of coverage under that plan
will be determined based on the
premium that is charged to tobacco
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
39504
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
users who complete this program. In the
preamble to proposed 26 CFR 1.36B–
2(c)(3)(v)(4) (78 FR 25911), Treasury
also noted that it expects to specify that
this treatment of nondiscriminatory
wellness programs will also be used in
determining the required contribution
for purposes of the lack of affordable
coverage exemption under section
5000A(e)(1) of the Code.
Accordingly, in order to ensure that
an individual is not liable for the shared
responsibility payment if he or she is
ineligible for advance payments of the
premium tax credit and cost-sharing
reductions as a result of a finding by the
Exchange that he or she is eligible for
qualifying coverage in an eligible
employer-sponsored plan based on
incorporating the completion of a
tobacco-related wellness program, we
specify in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(A) that
the Exchange will determine eligibility
for the exemption specified in
paragraph (g)(2) for an individual who
uses tobacco without incorporating any
discount resulting from the completion
of a wellness program designed to
prevent or reduce tobacco use. We also
specify in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(B) that
discounts from wellness incentives
offered by an eligible employersponsored plan that do not relate to
tobacco use are treated as not earned.
In paragraph (g)(2)(iv), we clarify that
in the case of an individual who is
ineligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan, or
only eligible to purchase coverage under
an eligible employer-sponsored plan
that does not meet the minimum value
standard, the Exchange will determine
the required contribution for coverage in
accordance with section
5000A(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the Code, inclusive
of all members of the individual’s
family who have not otherwise been
granted an exemption through the
Exchange, and who are not treated as
eligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that
meets the minimum value standard.
This determination is based on the
premium for the single lowest cost
bronze plan available, less any credit
allowable under section 36B of the
Code, in the individual market through
the Exchange serving the rating area in
which the individual resides.
Furthermore, we clarify that in
finalizing this provision, we specify in
paragraphs (g)(2)(v) and (g)(2)(vi) that
this exemption will be available
throughout the calendar year
prospectively for a month or months
until the last date on which an
individual could enroll in a QHP
through the calendar year for which the
exemption is requested. This refers not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
only to the open enrollment period, but
to any special enrollment period,
notwithstanding special effective dates,
for which an individual may potentially
be determined eligible during the
calendar year under 45 CFR 155.420(b).
As such, an individual may be
determined eligible for this exemption
for the remaining month or months of a
calendar year as late as November of
that calendar year, as the effective dates
for a special enrollment period under
§ 155.420(b) would still allow such an
individual to enroll in a QHP by
December of that calendar year. Lastly,
in order to reduce administrative
burden, we also specify in paragraph
(g)(2)(vi) that an exemption in this
category will be provided for all
remaining months in a coverage year,
notwithstanding any change in an
individual’s circumstances.
Comment: Some commenters wanted
to ensure that Exchanges would provide
clear and easily understandable
information to explain different
exemptions available to individuals,
including the steps needed to apply for
an exemption.
Response: We recognize the need for
consumer information that explains the
available exemptions as well as the
necessary documentation and steps
needed for individuals to apply. We
expect to work with states and other
stakeholders to ensure that individuals
are properly educated about the
exemption eligibility process.
Comment: One commenter wanted to
ensure that the Exchange would issue a
certificate of exemption to any
individual who is qualified and not
limit the availability of certificates to
only those individuals who are seeking
coverage through the Exchange.
Response: We agree with the
commenter that the Exchange will not
limit certificates of exemption to
individuals who are seeking coverage
through the Exchange. We note that a
hardship exemption will allow an
individual to enroll in a catastrophic
plan, both inside and outside the
Exchange, and the Exchange may not
limit the availability of an exemption
contingent on an individual seeking
coverage through the Exchange or
elsewhere. Further, while a portion of
the eligibility process for the hardship
exemption proposed in § 155.605(g)(4)
for individuals who are determined
ineligible for Medicaid based on a
state’s choice not to expand Medicaid
eligibility under the Affordable Care Act
relies on the eligibility process for
Medicaid, proposed § 155.610(a)
specifies that the Exchange will
generally use a separate application for
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
exemptions. We finalize this provision
as proposed.
Comment: One commenter was
supportive of HHS’ decision not to
specify that the Exchange would grant
the exemption specified in section
5000A(d)(3) of the Code for individuals
who are not lawfully present, but also
recommended clear guidance and
instructions regarding individuals who
nevertheless attempt to apply for this
exemption through the Exchange to
ensure that the Exchange will follow the
appropriate privacy and confidentiality
protections, and also to direct
individuals to claim this exemption
through the tax filing process.
Response: We note that the privacy
and confidentiality protections in 45
CFR 155.260 apply to the exemption
eligibility process, and are sufficient to
address these concerns. Furthermore,
we expect that the Exchange will
provide clear guidance regarding the
exemptions available through the
Exchange as well as the exemptions that
can be claimed solely through the tax
filing process, in order to appropriately
direct individuals.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions
proposed in § 155.605 of the proposed
rule with the following modifications:
We make technical corrections in
paragraphs (c) through (g) for the
purpose of clarity to specify when the
Exchange must make different
exemptions available, whether
prospectively or retrospectively. In
paragraph (c)(2) concerning the duration
of the exemption for religious
conscience, we specify that an
exemption in this category will be
provided on a continuing basis until the
month after the month of the
individual’s 21st birthday, and as such
if an Exchange granted such an
individual an exemption prior to the age
of 21, would have to send the applicant
a notice at that point to remind him or
her to submit a new application to
maintain the certificate of exemption.
We make revisions throughout
paragraph (g) to specify which hardship
exemptions must be granted by the
Exchange, and which can be claimed
only through the tax filing process. We
clarify that an Exchange will determine
an applicant eligible for an exemption
under paragraph (g)(1) of this section for
the month before, a month or months
during which they experience the
circumstances that qualify as a
hardship, and the month after. We make
a technical correction in paragraph
(g)(1)(i) to clarify that the financial or
domestic circumstances caused a
significant and unexpected increase in
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
essential expenses that prevented the
individual from obtaining coverage
under a QHP. We make a technical
correction in paragraphs (g)(1)(ii) to
replace ‘‘minimum essential coverage’’
with ‘‘qualified health plan’’ to align
with the statutory language describing
the hardship exemption, and modify
paragraph (g)(1)(iii) to clarify that
Exchange will determine an individual
eligible for a hardship exemption if he
or she experienced circumstances that
prevented him or her from obtaining
coverage under a QHP in accordance
with the statute.
We add paragraph (g)(2)(ii) to clarify
that the Exchange will only consider the
affordability of an eligible employersponsored plan for the exemption
described in paragraph (g)(2) if the
eligible employer-sponsored plan meets
the minimum value standard. We add
paragraph (g)(2)(iii) to clarify the
applicable standards if an individual is
eligible for coverage through an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that meets the
minimum value standard, and note in
paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(A) that an
individual who uses tobacco is treated
as not earning any premium incentive
related to participation in a wellness
program designed to prevent or reduce
tobacco use that is offered by an eligible
employer-sponsored plan, and in
paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(B) that discounts
from wellness incentives offered by an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that
do not relate to tobacco use are treated
as not earned. That is, for purposes of
this exemption, the cost of an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that includes
a premium differential for smokers and
non-smokers is calculated using the
non-smoker premium for non-smokers,
and the smoker premium for smokers,
without any discounts that may be
available through smoking cessation
programs. We outline the appropriate
methods to determine the required
contribution for coverage through an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that
meets the minimum value standard in
paragraphs (g)(2)(iii)(C) and (D),
depending on whether an individual is
an employee eligible to purchase
coverage under an eligible employersponsored plan through the employee’s
employer, or is eligible to purchase
coverage under an eligible employersponsored plan by reason of a
relationship to an employee. We specify
in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(D) that the
Exchange will consider the lowest cost
family coverage that meets the
minimum value standard that would
cover the employee and all other
individuals who are included in the
employee’s family who have not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
otherwise been granted an exemption
through the Exchange. We specify in
paragraph (g)(2)(iv) that the Exchange
will determine the required contribution
for coverage in the individual market in
the case of an individual who is
ineligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan in
accordance with section
5000A(e)(1)(B)(i) of the Code, or eligible
only to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that
does not meet the minimum value
standard, inclusive of all members of
the individual’s family who have not
otherwise been granted an exemption
through the Exchange, or are treated as
eligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that
meets the minimum value standard. We
also clarify in paragraphs (g)(2)(v) and
(g)(2)(vi) that this exemption will be
available throughout the calendar year
prospectively for a month or months
until the last date on which an
individual could enroll in a QHP
through the calendar year for which the
exemption is requested, and that the
Exchange will provide an exemption in
this category for all remaining months
in a coverage year, notwithstanding any
change in an individual’s
circumstances.
We clarify that the Exchange may not
grant the hardship exemptions under
paragraph (g)(3) and (5) of this section,
but rather only the IRS will allow an
applicant to claim these exemptions. We
add paragraph (g)(6) to provide that an
Exchange will determine an applicant
eligible for a hardship exemption for
any month for which he or she is an
Indian eligible for services through an
Indian health care provider, as defined
in 42 CFR 447.50, or an individual
eligible for services through the Indian
Health Service in accordance with 25
U.S.C. 1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3). We clarify
that the duration for the exemption
provided under paragraph (g)(6) of this
section is the same as specified in
paragraph (f)(2) of this section.
c. Eligibility Process for Exemptions
(§ 155.610)
In § 155.610, we proposed the process
by which the Exchange would
determine an applicant’s eligibility for
exemptions. In paragraph (a), we
proposed to specify that the Exchange
would use an application established by
HHS in order to collect the information
necessary to determine eligibility and
grant a certificate of exemption for an
applicant, unless the Exchange receives
approval to use an alternative
application. We also clarified that in
cases in which relevant information has
already been collected through the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39505
eligibility process for enrollment in a
QHP and for insurance affordability
programs, the Exchange would use this
information for the purpose of eligibility
for an exemption to the maximum
extent possible.
In paragraph (b), we proposed that the
Exchange may seek approval from HHS
for an alternative application. We
further specified that such alternative
application must only request the
minimum information necessary for the
purposes identified in paragraph (a) of
this section.
In noting that there are exemptions
that share common data and
verifications with the eligibility process
for enrollment in a QHP and for
insurance affordability programs, in
paragraph (c) we proposed that if an
individual submits the application in 45
CFR 155.405 and then requests an
exemption, the Exchange would use the
information collected on the application
for coverage and not duplicate any
verification processes that share the
standards specified in this subpart. We
solicited comments on how best to
coordinate these processes to ensure
maximum administrative simplicity for
all involved parties.
In paragraph (d), we proposed the
Exchange would accept the application
for an exemption from an application
filer, and provide tools for the
submission of an application. We did
not specify particular channels for
application acceptance, but we solicited
comments regarding whether we should
specify some or all of the channels
included in 45 CFR 155.405.
In paragraph (e), we proposed that the
Exchange would specify that an
applicant who has a social security
number (SSN) will provide such
number to the Exchange in order to
coordinate information in the tax filing
process and provide the Exchange with
additional information with which to
ensure program integrity. However, we
proposed to clarify in paragraphs (e)(2)
and (e)(3) that the Exchange may not
require an individual who is not seeking
an exemption for him or herself to
provide a SSN, except that the Exchange
would require an application filer to
provide the SSN for a non-applicant tax
filer only if the applicant attests that the
tax filer has a SSN and filed a tax return
for the year for which tax data would be
utilized to verify household income and
family size for a hardship exemption.
We solicited comments on the
applicability of this provision in the
context of the exemption eligibility
process.
In paragraph (f), we proposed that the
Exchange would grant a certificate of
exemption to any applicant determined
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
39506
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
eligible in accordance with the
standards for exemptions provided in
§ 155.605.
In paragraph (g)(1), we proposed that
the Exchange determine eligibility for
exemptions promptly and without
undue delay, which is the same timing
threshold used throughout subpart D of
this part, including in 45 CFR
155.310(e)(1), with respect to eligibility
determinations for enrollment in a QHP
and for insurance affordability
programs. In paragraph (g)(2), we
proposed that the assessment of
timeliness of eligibility determinations
by the Exchange is based on the period
from the date of the application until
the date on which the Exchange notifies
the applicant of its decision. We
solicited comments regarding specific
performance standards for the eligibility
process described in this subpart, and
whether we should define an outer
bound in which an eligibility
determination will be made.
In paragraph (h), we proposed to
clarify that except for the exemptions
for religious conscience and
membership in an Indian tribe proposed
in § 155.605(c) and § 155.605(f),
respectively, after December 31 of a
given calendar year, the Exchange will
not accept an application for an
exemption for months for such calendar
year. We intended to specify that this
provision also apply to the hardship
exemption under § 155.605(g), but
inadvertently did not include such
language in the text of the regulation.
We solicited comments regarding this
approach, and whether there should be
additional categories of exemptions for
which the Exchange would grant
exemptions after the close of a calendar
year.
In paragraph (i), we proposed that the
Exchange provide timely written notice
to an applicant of any eligibility
determination for an exemption made in
accordance with this subpart, which
could be provided through electronic
means, consistent with § 155.230(d).
In paragraph (j), we proposed that an
individual who has been certified by an
Exchange as qualifying for an exemption
retain the records that demonstrate not
only receipt of the certificate of
exemption but also qualification for the
underlying exemption. We noted that to
the extent that the Exchange provides a
certificate of exemption for which the
underlying verification is based in part
on the special circumstances exception
proposed in § 155.615(h), an individual
would retain records that demonstrate
receipt of the certificate of exemption,
as well as the circumstances that
warranted the use of the special
circumstances exception.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Comment: Commenters were
generally supportive of our proposals
throughout this section. One commenter
suggested that HHS codify the preamble
language specifying that individuals
could apply for multiple exemptions
simultaneously. Another commenter
sought clearer standards regarding the
eligibility process for exemptions in
order to limit administrative burden.
Response: We believe that the
language proposed in this section
provides the appropriate amount of
detail to guide the Exchange in
establishing an efficient process for
exemptions, while also allowing for the
Exchange to have the necessary
flexibility to administer these processes
effectively. We clarify that while we
believe individuals will benefit from the
opportunity to seek multiple
exemptions simultaneously, we feel that
the existing regulation text is sufficient,
and so are finalizing it as proposed.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that HHS revise the
language in § 155.610(a) to clarify that
except as specified, the Exchange must
use an application established by HHS
to collect only the information that is
‘‘strictly’’ necessary for determining
eligibility for an exemption. Another
commenter wanted HHS to crossreference to § 155.260 so that
information collected on the exemption
application was subject to the
appropriate security and privacy
protections.
Response: We share the commenter’s
concern regarding Exchanges using an
exemptions application that minimizes
the information individuals must
provide to receive an eligibility
determination for an exemption, and is
subject to robust privacy and security
protections. We believe that the
comment regarding limiting requests for
information to only what is necessary is
addressed in proposed § 155.615(j),
which limits the ability of the Exchange
to require the provision of information
by an applicant to support the eligibility
process for exemptions to the minimum
necessary, and is finalized as proposed.
We also note that § 155.260(a) already
includes language specifying that the
provisions of § 155.260 apply to the
exemptions process. Accordingly, we
are not including additional language in
this final regulation.
Comment: Commenters made several
suggestions with the goal of enhancing
the efficiency of the coverage and
exemptions application processes.
Several commenters supported our
proposals to re-use information from the
coverage application for the purposes of
exemptions eligibility determinations
when possible in order to prevent
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
collecting duplicate information. One
commenter recommended combining
the coverage application and
exemptions application in order to
streamline the eligibility determination
process for both enrollment in a QHP
and exemptions, reduce burden on
individuals and Exchanges, and inform
an applicant of all potential coverage or
exemptions options based on his or her
particular circumstances.
Response: As noted in our proposed
rule, we continue to believe that where
possible, individuals who apply for
coverage should not have to provide
duplicate information to the Exchange if
they subsequently decide to apply for an
exemption. We also believe that it is
important to have separate applications
for coverage and exemptions to avoid
creating burden on those individuals
who are only seeking coverage or
exemptions. Accordingly, we are
finalizing these provisions as proposed.
Comment: One commenter viewed the
language in § 155.610(c) regarding the
reuse of information collected through
the eligibility process for enrollment in
a QHP through the Exchange and for
insurance affordability programs as
confusing, and recommended the phrase
‘‘that adhere to the standards specified
in this subpart’’ be eliminated.
Response: We are modifying this
language to clarify that when an
Exchange has verified information
through the eligibility process for
enrollment in a QHP through the
Exchange and for insurance affordability
programs, and such verifications occur
in accordance with the standards
specified in this subpart, the Exchange
may not repeat the verification for
purposes of determining eligibility for
an exemption. For example, we note
that the verification procedures for the
exemption for members of an Indian
tribe cross-references the verification
procedures in subpart D of this part;
accordingly, if the Exchange verified
that an individual meets the standards
through the eligibility process for
enrollment in a QHP and for insurance
affordability programs, and such an
individual subsequently requests an
exemption based on membership in an
Indian tribe, the Exchange will not
repeat the verification.
Comment: Commenters urged that the
Exchange allow individuals to apply for
an exemption via the same channels as
the coverage application, including
online, by telephone, by mail, and in
person. One commenter raised
particular concerns in terms of allowing
individuals to have the full range of
options to apply for a religious
conscience exemption.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Response: We are committed to
providing an efficient and consumerfriendly application process for
exemptions. In § 155.610(d)(3), we
specify that for applications submitted
before October 15, 2014, the Exchange
must, at a minimum, accept such
applications in paper, via mail. We
believe that this will ensure the
availability of an effective process
within the time constraints that the
Exchange is facing for implementation,
while allowing for state flexibility to
utilize other channels sooner than
October 15, 2014. We intend to discuss
the availability of applications through
other channels beginning on or after
October 15, 2014 in a future regulation.
Comment: Several commenters
appreciated HHS’ proposal in
§ 155.610(e)(2) that the Exchange may
not require an individual who is seeking
an exemption on behalf of someone else
other than himself or herself to provide
a SSN. However, another commenter
expressed concerns that the broad
language used here would prevent the
collection of a SSN who are not seeking
an exemption, but rather are applying
for enrollment in a QHP.
Response: We appreciate the
commenter’s concerns, and note that
§ 155.610(e)(2) only applies to subpart G
regarding eligibility determinations for
exemptions, whereas 45 CFR
155.310(a)(3) provides the standards for
collecting Social Security numbers as
part of the eligibility process for
enrollment in a QHP through the
Exchange and for insurance affordability
programs. Accordingly, we are
finalizing the language as proposed.
Comment: Several commenters were
generally supportive of HHS specifying
that Exchanges determine individuals
eligible for an exemption ‘‘promptly and
without undue delay,’’ but also raised
concerns about the lack of clear
timeliness standards proposed at
§ 155.605(g). One commenter noted that
due to the lack of specificity, an
applicant for an exemption should not
be considered uninsured for the time it
takes to evaluate whether he or she is
qualified for an exemption. Other
commenters urged HHS to set more
clear timeliness standards. Another
commenter suggested that HHS specify
that Exchanges will grant an exemption
in real time when all documentation is
available electronically, and where an
applicant must submit paper
documentation, suggested specific
timeliness standards. A commenter
recommended that HHS more clearly
specify the meaning of the ‘‘date of the
application’’ in terms of the procedures
that Exchanges will use to log or stamp
an application date, and wanted to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
ensure that the date of the application
would be based on when an individual
submitted the application regardless of
when it is received by the Exchange.
The commenter also wanted to make
sure an individual receives the
appropriate notice and appeals rights if
the Exchange fails to promptly
determine eligibility.
Response: We drafted this provision
based on the timeliness standards for
the coverage process and believe that
the current language is appropriate.
Accordingly, we are finalizing this
provision as proposed. We are also
finalizing proposed paragraph (g)(2),
which specifies that the Exchange will
assess the timeliness of eligibility
determinations. As with the coverage
process, we intend to work closely with
Exchanges to monitor timeliness and
identify opportunities to improve
performance. We note that HHS does
not have authority to determine whether
an individual is liable for the shared
responsibility payment, as such
authority belongs to the Internal
Revenue Service. Comments addressing
the appeals process will be discussed in
a future regulation.
Comment: One commenter noticed a
discrepancy between the preamble
associated with § 155.610(h) and the
corresponding regulation text, whereby
the preamble mentioned that after
December 31 of a given calendar year,
the Exchange will not accept an
application for an exemption except for
the exemptions described in
§ 155.605(c) (religious conscience) and
(g) (hardship), but the regulation text
referenced § 155.605(c) and (f)
(membership in an Indian tribe).
Another commenter noted that the
preamble language associated with this
provision only allows an individual to
receive an exemption retrospectively
through the Exchange until an
individual could file an income tax
return, and asked whether HHS
intended to limit this to the regular tax
filing due date or to a potentially later
date if a taxpayer applies for an
extension or amends a previously filed
return. If HHS intended to limit this to
the regular tax filing date, the
commenter asked that HHS modify this
provision to clarify that the Exchange
will provide a retrospective exemption
for a calendar year up to the extended
filing date or amended filing date for
such year, should a taxpayer request an
extension or amend a return.
Response: We believe that it is
appropriate to provide exemptions
based on religious conscience and
membership in a federally-recognized
Indian tribe retrospectively, without a
time limit for filing. We note that as a
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39507
result of a drafting oversight, we did not
include a reference to the hardship
exemption in the regulation text to
specify that this should also be treated
differently than under the general rule,
and we correct this in the final
regulation. We also provide for further
special treatment for hardship
exemptions; specifically, that the
Exchange will only accept an
application for the hardship exemption
under paragraph § 155.605(g)(1) for a
month or months during a calendar year
when the application is filed during one
of the 3 calendar years after the month
or months during which the applicant
attests that the hardship occurred. We
believe that the circumstances of a
hardship exemption will motivate an
individual to seek such an exemption in
a timely manner, and also recognize the
need to balance the availability of this
exemption for an individual who
amends his or her tax return with the
administrative burden associated with
processing requests for prior years. We
further note that section 6511 of the
Code provides the period of limitations
on filing a claim for refund or credit
with the IRS. A taxpayer generally must
file an amended tax return by the later
of three years from the filing of the
original tax return or two years from the
time the tax was paid. Taxpayers need
to file amended returns within these
timeframes to ensure the receipt of a
refund of the shared responsibility
payment for a prior year through the
IRS, even though the Exchange may
appropriately grant a hardship
exemption anytime during the period
specified in § 155.605(g)(1). We
maintain the general rule regarding
exemptions for incarcerated individuals
and individuals who are members of a
health care sharing ministry, since these
will also be available through the tax
filing process, which should facilitate
access to these exemptions in the case
of amended returns.
Comment: Based on HHS’ proposal to
allow individuals to apply for multiple
exemptions, one commenter worried
about the potential that individuals
would be confused if receiving multiple
notices as a result. The commenter
requested that once an exemption is
granted for a period, HHS specify that
the Exchange would not provide a
notice regarding any further exemptions
for which an individual applied for the
same time period. The commenter
suggested that an individual should
only receive a denial notice for a month
or months where he or she does not
already have a certificate of exemption
in effect.
Response: We share the commenter’s
concerns regarding limiting potential
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39508
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
confusion for a consumer who applies
for multiple exemptions
simultaneously. Accordingly, we clarify
that in a situation in which an
individual applies for multiple
exemptions, we expect the Exchange
will provide the appropriate notice
regarding each exemption for which an
individual applied, as we believe that
not providing feedback for all requested
exemptions could create additional
confusion for consumers. We also
expect that if an applicant is approved
for an exemption, and then is later
denied for a different exemption for the
same period of time, the notice
describing the denial will clearly state
that the applicant’s prior exemption
remains in effect.
Comment: Regarding the proposed
recordkeeping provision at § 155.610(j),
commenters expressed concern that an
individual might think he or she only
needs to retain the exemption
certificate, and not records that
demonstrate his or her qualification for
the underlying exemption, and
recommended that HHS specify that the
Exchange notify individuals of their
obligation to retain the underlying
records as well. Another commenter
recommended deleting this paragraph
from the regulation, as they felt the
responsibility should rest on the IRS as
opposed to the Exchange.
Response: We agree with the
commenters’ suggestion to clarify that
the Exchange will notify individuals to
retain both the certificate of exemption
as well as records that demonstrate the
underlying qualification for the
exemption. We are maintaining this
paragraph with that clarification in the
final regulation, since the Exchange is
providing the certificate of exemption
and is thus ideally positioned to notify
individuals of this issue.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions
proposed in § 155.610 of the proposed
rule with a few slight modifications: We
clarify that the Exchange must use
information collected for purposes of
the eligibility determination for
enrollment in a QHP and for insurance
affordability programs in making the
exemption eligibility determination to
the extent that the Exchange finds that
such information is still applicable. In
§ 155.610(d)(3), we specify that until
October 15, 2014, the Exchange must, at
a minimum, permit an individual to
apply for an exemption via mail, using
a paper application. We correct the
oversight in paragraph § 155.610(h) by
providing that an applicable exemption
that is available retrospectively and
described in § 155.605(g) can also be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
provided for previous tax years based on
an application that is submitted after
December 31 of a given calendar year,
except for § 155.605(g)(1), which may
only be provided during one of the 3
calendar years after the month or
months during which the applicant
attests that the hardship occurred. Due
to the range of hardship exemptions
available, we redesignate paragraph (h)
as paragraph (h)(1), make a technical
correction for clarity in paragraph (h)(1),
and add paragraph (h)(2) to specify that
the Exchange will only accept an
application for a hardship exemption
specified in § 155.605(g)(1) for a month
or months during a calendar year when
the application is filed during one of the
3 calendar years after the month or
months during which the applicant
attests that the hardship occurred. We
also modify paragraph (j)(1) to specify
that an Exchange will also notify an
individual who is determined eligible
for an exemption to retain the certificate
of exemption, and also records
demonstrating his or her qualification
for the underlying exemption.
d. Verification Process Related to
Eligibility For Exemptions (§ 155.615)
In this section, we proposed language
regarding the verification process
related to eligibility for exemptions.
These processes were designed not only
to minimize the burden on applicants,
but also to serve a valuable program
integrity function in order to assure that
applicants are only deemed eligible for
exemptions if they meet the standards
specified in § 155.605.
In paragraph (a), we proposed that
unless HHS grants a request for
modification under paragraph (i) of this
section, the Exchange will verify or
obtain information as provided in this
section in order to determine that the
applicant is eligible for an exemption.
In paragraph (b), we proposed the
verification process concerning the
exemption for religious conscience. We
specified that for any applicant
requesting this exemption, the Exchange
will verify that he or she meets the
standards as outlined in § 155.605(c).
First, in paragraph (b)(1), we proposed
that except as specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, the Exchange will
accept a Form 4029 that reflects that an
applicant has been approved for an
exemption from Social Security and
Medicare taxes under section 1402(g)(1)
of the Code by the IRS. Second, in
paragraph (b)(2), we proposed that
except as specified in paragraphs (b)(3)
and (4) of this section, the Exchange
will accept an applicant’s attestation
that he or she is a member of a
recognized religious sect or division
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
described in section 1402(g)(1) of the
Code, and an adherent of established
tenets or teachings of such sect or
division. Next, the Exchange will verify
that the religious sect or division to
which the applicant attests membership
is recognized by SSA as a religious sect
or division under section 1402(g)(1) of
the Code.
Third, in paragraph (b)(3), we
proposed that if the information
provided by an applicant regarding his
or her membership in a recognized
religious sect or division is not
reasonably compatible with other
information provided by the individual
or the records of the Exchange, the
Exchange will follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (g) of this section
concerning situations in which the
Exchange is unable to verify
information.
Fourth, in paragraph (b)(4), we
proposed that if an applicant attests to
membership in a religious sect or
division that is not recognized by SSA
as a religious sect or division under
section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, the
Exchange must provide the applicant
with information regarding how his or
her religious sect or division can pursue
recognition under section 1402(g)(1) of
the Code, and determine the applicant
ineligible for this exemption until such
time as the Exchange obtains
information indicating that the religious
sect or division has been approved.
In paragraph (c), we proposed the
verification process concerning the
exemption for membership in a health
care sharing ministry. We specified that
for any applicant requesting this
exemption, the Exchange will verify
whether he or she meets the standards
in § 155.605(d). First, in paragraph
(c)(1), we proposed that except as
specified in paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of
this section, the Exchange will first
accept an attestation from an applicant
that he or she is a member of a health
care sharing ministry. Next, we
proposed that the Exchange will verify
that the health care sharing ministry to
which the applicant attests membership
is known to the Exchange as a health
care sharing ministry, based on a list
that would be developed by HHS based
on outreach to heath care sharing
ministries, which HHS would then
make available to Exchanges.
In paragraph (c)(2), we proposed that
if the information provided by an
applicant regarding his or her
membership in a health care sharing
ministry is not reasonably compatible
with other information provided by the
individual or the records of the
Exchange, the Exchange will follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (g) of
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
this section concerning situations in
which the Exchange is unable to verify
information.
In paragraph (c)(3), we proposed that
if an applicant attests to membership in
a health care sharing ministry that is
unknown to the Exchange as a health
care sharing ministry according to the
standards in § 155.605(d), the Exchange
will then notify HHS and not determine
an applicant eligible or ineligible for
this exemption until HHS informs the
Exchange regarding the attested health
care sharing ministry’s status with
respect to the standards specified in 26
CFR 1.5000A–3(b) of the Treasury
proposed rule.
In paragraph (d), we proposed the
verification process concerning the
exemption for incarceration. We
specified that for any applicant
requesting this exemption, the Exchange
will verify, through the process
described in 45 CFR 155.315(e), that he
or she was incarcerated. In paragraph
(d)(2), we proposed that if the Exchange
is unable to verify an applicant’s
incarceration status through the
verification process outlined, the
Exchange will follow the procedures in
paragraph (g) of this section concerning
situations in which the Exchange is
unable to verify information.
In paragraph (e), we proposed the
verification process concerning the
exemption for members of Indian tribes.
We specified in paragraph (e)(1) that for
any applicant requesting this
exemption, the Exchange will verify his
or her membership in an Indian tribe
through the process outlined in 45 CFR
155.350(c). In paragraph (e)(2), we also
proposed that the Exchange follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (g) of
this section if it is unable to verify an
applicant’s tribal membership.
In paragraph (f), we proposed the
verification process concerning
exemptions for hardship. In paragraph
(f)(2), we proposed that for an applicant
applying for a hardship exemption
prospectively based on an inability to
afford coverage, as described in
§ 155.605(g)(2), the Exchange use
procedures established under subpart D
of this part to verify the availability of
affordable coverage through the
Exchange based on projected income
and eligibility for advance payments of
the premium tax credit, as specified in
subpart D of this part, which involves
verifying several attestations by the
applicant, including an attestation
related to citizenship, as well as the
procedures described in § 155.320(e) to
verify eligibility for qualifying coverage
in an eligible employer-sponsored plan.
We solicited comments regarding
appropriate verification procedures for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
other categories of hardship that will
ensure a high degree of program
integrity while minimizing
administrative burden.
In paragraph (g), we proposed
procedures for the Exchange to follow in
the event the Exchange is unable to
verify information necessary to make an
eligibility determination for an
exemption, including situations in
which an applicant’s attestation is not
reasonably compatible with information
in electronic data sources or other
information in the records of the
Exchange, or when electronic data are
required but unavailable. These
procedures mirror those provided in
§ 155.315(f), with modifications to
preclude eligibility pending the
outcome of the verification process,
made in accordance with the Secretary’s
authority under section 1411 of the
Affordable Care Act.
First, under paragraph (g)(1), we
proposed that the Exchange will make a
reasonable effort to identify and address
the causes of the issue, including
through typographical or other clerical
errors, by contacting the application
filer to confirm the accuracy of the
information submitted by the
application filer. Second, in paragraph
(g)(2)(i), we proposed that if the
Exchange is unable to resolve the issue,
the Exchange will notify the applicant
of the issue. After providing this notice,
in paragraph (g)(2)(ii), we proposed that
the Exchange will provide 30 days from
the date on which the notice is sent for
the applicant to present satisfactory
documentary evidence via the channels
available for the submission of an
application, except by telephone, or
otherwise resolve the issues. In
paragraph (g)(3), we proposed that the
Exchange may extend the period for an
applicant to resolve the issue if the
applicant can provide evidence that a
good faith effort has been made to
obtain the necessary documentation.
And in paragraph (g)(4), we proposed
that the Exchange will not grant a
certificate of exemption during this
period based on the information that is
the subject of the request under this
paragraph.
In paragraph (g)(5), we proposed that,
if after the conclusion of the period
described in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this
section, the Exchange is unable to verify
the applicant’s attestation, the Exchange
will determine the applicant’s eligibility
based on the information available from
the data sources specified in this
subpart, as applicable, unless such
applicant qualifies for the exception
provided under paragraph (h) of this
section, and notify the applicant in
accordance with the procedures
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39509
described under § 155.610(i), including
the inability to verify the applicant’s
attestation.
In paragraph (h), we proposed a
provision under which the Exchange
would provide a case-by-case exception
for applicants for whom documentation
does not exist or is not reasonably
available to account for situations in
which documentation cannot be
obtained.
In paragraph (i), we proposed that
HHS have the flexibility to approve an
Exchange Blueprint or a significant
change to an Exchange Blueprint to
modify the methods for the collection
and verification of information as
described in this subpart, as well as the
specific information to be collected,
based on a finding by HHS that the
requested modification would reduce
the administrative costs and burdens on
individuals while maintaining accuracy
and minimizing delay, and that any
applicable requirements under 45 CFR
155.260, 45 CFR 155.270, paragraph (j)
of this section, and section 6103 of the
Code with respect to the confidentiality,
disclosure, maintenance, or use of
information will be met.
In paragraph (j), we proposed that the
Exchange will not require an applicant
to provide information beyond what is
necessary to support the process of the
Exchange for eligibility determinations
for exemptions, including the process
for resolving inconsistencies described
in paragraph (g) of this section.
Comment: One commenter raised
broad concerns about potential
challenges for consumers regarding
verification, and requested that HHS
specify a 1-year transition period during
which the Exchange would rely
primarily on self-attestation, using a
form signed under penalty of perjury, or
auditing a portion of applications
submitted by individuals.
Response: We share the commenter’s
desire for a good consumer experience
for those individuals who are seeking an
exemption. However, we believe that
statutory and program integrity
concerns argue in favor of the Exchange
applying a more comprehensive
verification process than self-attestation.
We expect to learn from the initial
months and years of operations, and to
work with states to achieve continuous
improvement, with a particular focus on
the consumer experience.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that a taxpayer who
already has an approved IRS Form 4029
should not have to request an
exemption through the Exchange, and
instead should be able to write ‘‘Exempt
Form 4029’’ on his or her tax return.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
39510
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Response: We strive to establish an
Exchange exemption process that
minimizes the burden on individuals to
the extent possible. We note that section
5000A(d)(2) of the Code specifies that
the religious conscience exemption is
available only through the Exchange.
However, we note that we are finalizing
proposed § 155.615(b)(1), which
specifies that the verification process for
this exemption will include the
Exchange accepting an approved IRS
Form 4029 for any individual who has
one.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that in situations in
which the health care sharing ministry
to which an individual attests
membership is not included on the list
provided to the Exchange by HHS, HHS
should issue the eligibility
determination notice denying the
exemption as opposed to the Exchange.
Response: If an Exchange accepts the
original exemption application from an
individual, we continue to believe that
it is appropriate for the Exchange to
issue the corresponding eligibility
determination notice in order to prevent
confusion that individuals may
experience if receiving a separate notice
from HHS. We note that nothing
precludes an Exchange from notifying
such an individual that the
determination is based on a list
provided by HHS.
Comment: One commenter requested
further specificity about the process and
standards HHS will use in developing
the list of health care sharing ministries
that meet the standards specified in the
statute.
Response: We recognize the
importance of providing a clear process
for establishing the list of health care
sharing ministries that meet the
statutory standards. Accordingly, we are
renumbering proposed § 155.615(c) as
§ 155.615(c)(1)(i) through (iii), and
adding § 155.615(c)(2) to specify a
process that is substantially similar to
the approach discussed in § 155.604(c)
regarding how HHS will determine that
certain types of coverage meet the
substantive and procedural
requirements for consideration as
minimum essential coverage.
Specifically, we note that to be
considered a health care sharing
ministry for the purposes of this
subpart, an organization will submit
information to HHS that substantiates
the organization’s compliance with the
standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code. We also
note that if at any time HHS determines
that an organization previously
considered a health care sharing
ministry for the purposes of this subpart
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
no longer meets the standards specified
in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the
Code, HHS may revoke its earlier
decision. This revocation refers to the
status of the health care sharing
ministry, and not to the status of an
individual’s exemption related to
membership in a health care sharing
ministry. As such, while the Exchange
would not grant an exemption to an
individual attesting membership in such
a health care sharing ministry after
revoking its status, the Exchange would
not revoke a prior exemption granted to
an individual based on the status of a
health care sharing ministry. We discuss
this information collection in the
Information Collection Requirements
section of this final rule.
We also clarify in paragraph (c)(1)(iii)
that if an applicant attests to
membership in a health care sharing
ministry that is not known to the
Exchange as a health care sharing
ministry based on information provided
by HHS, the Exchange must provide the
applicant with information regarding
how an organization can pursue
recognition under § 155.615(c)(2), and
determine the applicant ineligible for
this exemption until such time as HHS
notifies the Exchange that the health
care sharing ministry’s meets the
standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code. We note
that individual members cannot seek
recognition under § 155.615(c)(2) on
behalf of their health care sharing
ministry, as HHS will only review
information submitted by the health
care sharing ministry itself.
Comment: One commenter urged HHS
to remove the reference to reasonable
compatibility as part of verifying
membership in a health care sharing
ministry, or to clarify that an individual
could still receive an exemption based
on membership in a health care sharing
ministry if he or she had been enrolled
in health insurance in the past or was
currently enrolled in health insurance.
Response: In response to the
commenter, we will clarify that the
Exchange will not consider an
individual’s current or previous health
coverage as reasonably incompatible
with membership in a health care
sharing ministry, since nothing in the
statute limits the availability of such an
exemption to an individual who was or
is uninsured.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that for purposes of the FederallyFacilitated Exchange, HHS work with
local tribes and the Bureau of Indian
Affairs to contract for the verification of
membership in an Indian tribe.
Response: We appreciate this
comment, and are committed to creating
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
an efficient eligibility process for all
applicants. In proposed § 155.615(e), we
specified that the Exchange would use
the same verification process that is
used for the verification of Indian status
for purposes of special cost-sharing
provisions and special enrollment
periods for enrollment in a QHP through
the Exchange. The cross-referenced
section allows an Exchange to rely on
any electronic data sources that have
been approved by HHS for this purpose,
including electronic data acquired from
tribes. Based on the short timeline for
implementation, for October 1, 2013, the
Federally-facilitated Exchange will be
unable to collect data from individual
tribes, and so will rely on a paper
documentation process. State-based
Exchanges may have additional
opportunities for October 1, 2013.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that HHS should specify
that an individual renew an exemption
based on membership in an Indian tribe
on an annual basis. Other commenters
urged HHS to use electronic data
matching with the Indian Health Service
(IHS) as one tool to verify membership
in an Indian tribe as well as the
suggested hardship exemptions
discussed above. Commenters asked
HHS to specify that the Exchange first
consult all available electronic data
sources; second, if electronic data
sources do not support an applicant’s
attestation, seek paper documentation;
and third, and if individuals lack the
appropriate documentation, call the
listed tribe’s Contract Health Services
Officer or tribal enrollment office.
Response: We modeled the
verification process for the exemption
based on an individual’s membership in
an Indian tribe on the verification
process that will be used for individuals
seeking coverage at 45 CFR 155.350(c).
We appreciate the suggestions from
commenters, as they generally follow
our approach in 45 CFR 155.350(c).
Specifically, in 45 CFR 155.350(c), we
specify that the Exchange will first use
any approved electronic data sources,
and only request paper documentation
when electronic data sources are
unavailable or do not support an
applicant’s attestation. 45 CFR
155.350(c) does not specify that the
Exchange will contact a tribe’s Contract
Health Services Officer or tribal
enrollment office when documentation
is unavailable. Rather, in § 155.615(h),
we proposed that when documentation
does not exist or is not reasonably
available, the Exchange will provide an
exception on a case-by-case basis and
accept an applicant’s attestation. We
also note that Exchanges have flexibility
to work with local tribes to gain
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
information that could be used on an
electronic basis.
Comment: One commenter worried
that the proposed verifications process
placed too much burden on individuals
as opposed to the Exchange, and urged
HHS to shift this burden in the future.
Response: We have attempted to limit
burden on individuals as much as
possible in the proposed and final
regulations. We intend to work with all
relevant stakeholders in the future to
identify opportunities to increase the
efficiency and integrity of the
verification process.
Comment: Commenters expressed
concerns regarding proposed
§ 155.615(g) and situations where the
Exchange is unable to verify the
necessary information to determine
eligibility for an exemption. Some
commenters requested greater
clarification to limit any possible
confusion about when attestations
should be accepted, when attestations
must be verified, when documents must
be provided, and what type of
documents would be sufficient.
Additionally commenters expressed
concerns about the 30-day time period
for individuals to present satisfactory
documentary evidence to the Exchange
in order to resolve an inconsistency, and
urged extending this time period, or
providing flexibility for the Exchange to
ensure that individuals have a
‘‘reasonable opportunity’’ to submit
documentation.
Response: In response to comments,
we will modify proposed
§ 155.615(g)(2)(ii) to allow an individual
90 days to present satisfactory
documentary evidence to the Exchange,
which is the time period used in the
eligibility process for enrollment in a
QHP, advance payments of the premium
tax credit, and cost-sharing reductions.
We will maintain the proposed language
specifying that an individual is not
eligible for an exemption during this
time period. As the language from
paragraph (g) is modeled after the
inconsistency process from § 155.315(f),
we believe that this provision already
describes the process concerning an
Exchange’s inability to verify necessary
information with sufficient clarity to
limit confusion. The notices that the
Exchange provides to an individual for
whom the Exchange is unable to verify
necessary information will specify the
documentation that such an individual
can submit to resolve an inconsistency.
Comment: Multiple commenters
expressed support for our proposal at
§ 155.615(h) to provide an exception on
a case-by-case basis for individuals who
lack certain documentation, although
some sought further clarification to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
prevent confusion. One commenter
suggested that paragraph (h) of this
section should extend not only to
circumstances when the Exchange has
information that is inconsistent with an
individual’s attestation but also to
circumstances when the attestation
itself cannot be verified through other
data sources.
Response: As this exception for
special circumstances mirrors similar
language used in regards to the coverage
process at § 155.315(g), we maintain the
language as proposed. We clarify that
this provision is designed to address
any situation in which documentation is
needed, but does not exist or is not
reasonably available.
Comment: One commenter expressed
support for § 155.615(j), which limits
the collection of application information
to the minimum amount necessary,
while also recommending that HHS
amend this provision to ensure
alignment with section 1411(g) of the
Affordable Care Act.
Response: We affirm that the
Exchange should collect only the
minimum information necessary to
support the eligibility process for
exemptions. The proposed language
mirrors that used in 45 CFR 155.315(i),
which is designed to implement section
1411(g)(1) of the Affordable Care Act.
We also note that the overarching
privacy and security protections
specified in 45 CFR 155.260 apply to the
exemptions process. Together, we
believe that these sections already
appropriately address the commenter’s
concerns regarding information
collection and privacy.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions
proposed in § 155.615 of the proposed
rule with several modifications, as
follows. First, we make a technical
correction in paragraph (b)(1) to specify
that the Exchange must accept a form
that reflects he or she is exempt from
Social Security and Medicare taxes
under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code.
Second, we clarify that if an applicant
attests to membership in a religious sect
or division that is not recognized by the
SSA as an approved religious sect or
division under section 1402(g)(1) of the
Code, the Exchange will provide the
applicant with information regarding
how his or her religious sect or division
can pursue recognition under section
1402(g)(1) of the Code, and determine
the applicant ineligible for this
exemption until such time as the
Exchange obtains information indicating
that the religious sect or division has
been approved. Third, we renumber
proposed § 155.615(c), move the
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39511
language from previous paragraph (c)(1)
into paragraph (c), redesignating
paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) as
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii), and add
§ 155.615(c)(2) to specify a process for
establishing the list of health care
sharing ministries that meet the
statutory standards that is substantially
similar to the approach discussed in
§ 155.604(c) regarding how HHS will
determine that certain types of coverage
meet the substantive and procedural
requirements for consideration as
minimum essential coverage. We also
specify in paragraph (c)(1)(i) that the
Exchange may not consider an
applicant’s prior or current enrollment
in health coverage as not reasonably
compatible with an applicant’s
attestation of membership in a health
care sharing ministry, and we specify in
paragraph (c)(1)(ii) that if an applicant
attests to membership in a health care
sharing ministry that is not known to
the Exchange as a health care sharing
ministry based on information provided
by HHS, the Exchange will provide the
applicant with information regarding
how an organization can pursue
recognition under § 155.615(c)(2), and
determine the applicant ineligible for
this exemption until such time as HHS
notifies the Exchange that the health
care sharing ministry’s meets the
standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
We specify in paragraph (f)(1) that the
Exchange will not verify whether an
applicant experienced a hardship under
§ 155.605(g)(3) or (5); rather, these
exemptions will be claimed directly
with the IRS at tax filing. We
redesignate paragraph (f)(2) as
paragraph (f)(2)(i), make a technical
correction in redesignated paragraph
(f)(2)(i) to clarify that the procedures
used to determine eligibility for advance
payments of the premium tax credit in
subpart D include § 155.315(c)(1). We
note that at 78 FR 4638, we proposed to
consolidate § 155.320(d) and (e) into
§ 155.320(d). To the extent that we
finalize this redesignation, we intend to
make a simultaneous technical
correction to this cross-reference. We
add new paragraph (f)(2)(ii) to clarify
that in determining eligibility for the
lack of affordable coverage based on
projected income hardship exemption,
the Exchange will accept an application
filer’s attestation for an applicant
regarding eligibility for minimum
essential coverage other than through an
eligible employer-sponsored plan. We
redesignate paragraph (f)(3) as
paragraph (f)(4), and add new paragraph
(f)(3) to specify that the Exchange will
use the same verification procedures for
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39512
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
the exemption for an individual who is
eligible for services through an Indian
health care provider as it will use for the
exemption for members of a federallyrecognized tribe.
In 78 FR 4636, we proposed to modify
§ 155.315(f) to specify that the Exchange
would trigger an inconsistency when
electronic data is required but not
reasonably expected to be available
within 2 days. To ensure alignment
across the eligibility process for
enrollment in a QHP through the
Exchange and insurance affordability
programs with the eligibility process for
exemptions, we make a technical
correction to specify that the Exchange
will trigger the process under
§ 155.615(g) when electronic data is
required but not reasonably expected to
be available within the time period
specified as § 155.315(f). We modify
§ 155.615(g)(2)(ii) to allow an applicant
90 days to present satisfactory
documentary evidence to resolve an
inconsistency. Lastly, we add paragraph
(k) to mirror the Exchange’s requirement
regarding the validation of a Social
Security number for an individual
applying for an exemption from the
shared responsibility payment with the
same validation process for purposes of
individual seeking coverage as
described in § 155.315(b).
e. Eligibility Redeterminations for
Exemptions During a Calendar Year
(§ 155.620)
In § 155.620, we proposed in
paragraph (a) to implement section
1411(f) of the Affordable Care Act by
providing that the Exchange will
redetermine an individual’s eligibility
for an exemption if the Exchange
receives and verifies new information as
reported by an individual. In paragraph
(b)(1), we proposed that the Exchange
will require an individual with a
certificate of exemption to report any
changes related to the eligibility
standards described in § 155.605. We
solicited comments as to whether we
should provide flexibility such that the
Exchange may establish a reasonable
threshold for changes in income, such
that an individual who experiences a
change in income that is below the
threshold is not required to report such
change.
In paragraph (b)(2), we proposed that
the Exchange would allow an individual
to report changes through the channels
acceptable for the submission of an
exemption application.
In paragraph (c), we proposed that the
Exchange use the verification processes
used at the point of initial application,
as described in § 155.615, in order to
verify any changes reported by an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
individual prior to using the selfreported information in an eligibility
determination for an exemption. In
paragraph (c)(2), we proposed that the
Exchange notify an individual in
accordance with § 155.610(i) after redetermining his or her eligibility based
on a reported change. Lastly, in
paragraph (c)(3), we proposed that the
Exchange provide periodic electronic
notifications regarding the requirements
for reporting changes and an
individual’s opportunity to report any
changes, to an individual who has a
certificate of exemption and who has
elected to receive electronic
notifications, unless he or she has
declined to receive such notifications.
We noted that unlike § 155.330, we did
not propose that the Exchange conduct
periodic data matching regarding an
individual’s eligibility for an exemption.
We solicited comments as to whether
we should establish similar data
matching provisions, and if so, whether
we should specify that the Exchange
should handle changes identified
through the matching process in a
similar manner as to that specified in
§ 155.330, or take a different approach.
Also unlike the eligibility process for
enrollment in a QHP and for insurance
affordability programs, we did not
propose an annual Exchange
redetermination process for exemptions.
We solicited comments regarding how
the Exchange could expedite and
streamline the process for individuals
with a certificate of exemption that is
not approved indefinitely who wish to
maintain the exemption for a
subsequent year.
Comment: One commenter stated that
individuals should not have to report
changes in religious status or their
status as a member of an Indian tribe,
but rather the religious sect or tribe
should report such a change in status to
the Exchange or HHS in order to prevent
fraud.
Response: We share the commenter’s
program integrity concerns, but
continue to believe that the
responsibility to report changes remains
appropriately on the individual who has
received an exemption. As Exchanges
start to grant exemptions, we will work
with states to monitor the process and
determine whether changes would be
appropriate.
Comment: One commenter sought
clarification as to whether
redeterminations only occur when an
individual reports a change or whether
the Exchange has the authority to cancel
an exemption it previously granted on
its own.
Response: We clarify that
redeterminations under this section can
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
only occur when an individual reports
a change that impacts his or her
eligibility determination for an
exemption.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concerns regarding the
burden involved in requiring an
individual to report changes that would
impact his or her eligibility for an
exemption. One commenter inquired
about how HHS would enforce the
regulatory reporting requirements.
Response: The proposed approach is
identical to the approach taken in
§ 155.330(b), and we believe that it is
generally appropriate for eligibility for
enrollment in a QHP through the
Exchange, advance payments of the
premium tax credit, cost-sharing
reductions, and exemptions. With that
said, as noted above, we have modified
the eligibility standards, in order to
reduce administrative burden, for the
hardship exemption specified in
§ 155.605(g)(2), which covers situations
in which an individual lacks affordable
coverage based on projected household
income, such that the Exchange will
provide this exemption for all remaining
months in a coverage year,
notwithstanding any change in an
individual’s circumstances.
Accordingly, we modify paragraphs (a),
(b), and (c)(3) to conform to this change
by clarifying that the Exchange will not
conduct mid-year redeterminations for
this exemption, will not require
individuals receiving this exemption to
report changes, and will not send
periodic reminders to report changes to
individuals who have this exemption.
As Exchanges start to grant exemptions,
we will work with states to monitor the
process and determine whether other
changes would be appropriate.
Comment: Commenters raised
concerns about requiring individuals to
report changes, and suggested that if
HHS maintains these requirements, they
should provide a special enrollment
period for an individual who loses their
exemption in the middle of a calendar
year as a result of a redetermination and
who has no opportunity to enroll in
coverage, which would leave them
potentially liable for the shared
responsibility payment.
Response: We do not want to create
an incentive for an individual who has
an exemption to not report changes in
their eligibility. We also do not want to
create a situation in which an
individual who has followed procedures
and wants to enroll in health coverage
is instead liable for the shared
responsibility payment. We are adding
paragraph (d) to clarify that the
Exchange will implement a change
resulting from a redetermination under
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
this section for the month or months
after the month in which the
redetermination occurs such that a
certificate that was provided for the
month in which the redetermination
occurs, and for prior months, remains
effective. We address the ability of an
individual who loses eligibility for an
exemption following a redetermination
to enroll in a QHP in the guidance
published simultaneously with this
final regulation.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the Exchange provide periodic
electronic notifications regarding
reporting changes to individuals only if
they decide to receive such notifications
as opposed to providing individuals
periodic electronic notifications
regarding reporting changes unless they
affirmatively decline to receive such
notifications.
Response: As we proposed this
provision to mirror a similar provision
concerning the coverage process at
§ 155.330(c)(2), we maintain the
provision as proposed, with the
modification discussed above to
eliminate this notification for
individuals who have the exemption
specified in § 155.605(g)(2).
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions
proposed in § 155.620 of the proposed
rule with a few slight modifications. We
clarify in paragraph (a) that the
Exchange only must redetermine the
eligibility of an individual with an
exemption granted by the Exchange, and
that it will not conduct
redeterminations for the exemption
described in § 155.605(g)(2). In
paragraph (b), we specify that the
Exchange will not require an individual
who has an exemption under
§ 155.605(g)(2) to report changes with
respect to his or her eligibility for this
exemption; accordingly, in paragraph
(c)(3), we clarify that the Exchange will
not provide periodic reminders to report
changes to this group of individuals. We
also add paragraph (d) to specify that
the Exchange will implement a change
resulting from a redetermination under
this section for the month or months
after the month in which the
redetermination occurs, such that a
certificate that was provided for the
month in which the redetermination
occurs, and for prior months, remains
effective.
f. Options for Conducting Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions
(§ 155.625)
In § 155.625, we proposed that a statebased Exchange can satisfy the
requirements of subpart G if it uses a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
federally-managed service to make
eligibility determinations for
exemptions, and we solicited comments
regarding the specific configuration of a
service that would be useful for states
and also feasible within the time
remaining for implementation.
First, in paragraph (a), we proposed
that the Exchange may satisfy the
requirements of this subpart by either
executing all eligibility functions,
directly or through contracting
arrangements described in 45 CFR
155.110(a), or through the use of a
federally-managed service described in
paragraph (b) of § 155.625.
Second, in paragraph (b), we
proposed that the Exchange may
implement an eligibility determination
for an exemption made by HHS,
provided that the Exchange accepts the
application, as specified in § 155.610(d),
and issues the eligibility notice, as
specified in § 155.610(i), and that
verifications and other activities
required in connection with eligibility
determinations for exemptions are
performed by the Exchange in
accordance with the standards
identified in this subpart or by HHS in
accordance with the agreement
described in paragraph (b)(4) of this
section. We also proposed that under
this option, the Exchange will transmit
all applicant information and other
information obtained by the Exchange to
HHS, and adhere to HHS’
determination. Lastly, in paragraph
(b)(4), we proposed that the Exchange
and HHS enter into an agreement
specifying their respective
responsibilities in connection with
eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
In paragraph (c), we proposed the
standards to which the Exchange will
adhere when eligibility determinations
are made in accordance with paragraph
(b) of this section. Such standards
included that the arrangement does not
increase administrative costs and
burdens on individuals, or increase
delay, and that applicable requirements
under § 155.260, § 155.270, and
§ 155.315(i), and section 6103 of the
Code are met with respect to the
confidentiality, disclosure, maintenance
or use of information.
Comment: Commenters expressed
general support for the proposals in
§ 155.625 in regards to the ability for a
state-based Exchange to satisfy the
requirements of this subpart by either
executing all eligibility functions
directly, through contracting
arrangements, or through the use of a
federally-managed service described in
paragraph (b). Commenters urged HHS
to further help reduce the burden on
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39513
Exchanges developing the operational
capacity needed to conduct eligibility
determinations for exemptions. Another
commenter wanted to clarify that an
Exchange relying on HHS to make an
eligibility determination for an
exemption could also rely on HHS to
administer the exemptions appeals
process.
Response: In response to comments
seeking to limit the burden on
Exchanges, and based on the operational
capacity of the Exchange and HHS being
able to comply with the statutory
requirements to accept exemptions
applications and issue eligibility
determination notices for the first year
of operations, we are modifying the
proposed language regarding how the
Exchange may rely on the use of an HHS
service.
We specify that for an application
submitted prior to October 15, 2014, the
Exchange may rely on HHS to process
exemptions applications, complete the
necessary verifications, determine
eligibility, and issue notices, including
any certificates of exemption. Exchanges
will still assist individuals seeking a
lack of affordable coverage based on
projected income hardship exemption
by providing an individual with the
resulting cost of his or her lowest-cost
bronze plan that incorporates any
advance payments of the premium tax
credit allowable under section 36B of
the Code. Additionally, the Exchange
call center and Internet Web site as
specified in 45 CFR 155.205(a) and (b)
respectively, must be responsible for
providing information to consumers
regarding the exemption eligibility
process.
For an application submitted on or
after October 15, 2014, the Exchange
may adopt an exemption eligibility
determination made by HHS provided
that the Exchange accepts the
application and issues the eligibility
notice in the same manner as discussed
in the proposed rule. As a result of
clarifying the flexibility for Exchanges
prior to October 15, 2014, we
accordingly remove paragraph (c).
We also note that comments regarding
the appeals process for exemptions will
be addressed in a future regulation. We
expect that future rulemaking will
clarify that if an Exchange relies on HHS
to make an eligibility determination for
an exemption, the Exchange may also
rely on HHS to administer the
exemptions appeals process as well,
provided that any underlying decisions
made by the Exchange are addressed
through the appropriate Exchange
appeals process.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39514
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are modifying the provisions
proposed in § 155.625 to eliminate
proposed paragraph (c). We redesignate
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5) as
(b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(v) to clarify that
the standards discussed therein apply to
an Exchange seeking to rely on an
exemption eligibility determination
made by HHS on or after October 15,
2014. We add (b)(1) to reflect that HHS
will administer the entire eligibility
process for exemptions for Exchanges
that decide to rely on HHS to conduct
eligibility determinations for an
application submitted before October
15, 2014, provided that the Exchange
adheres to the eligibility determination
made by HHS furnishes any information
available through the Exchange that is
necessary for an applicant to utilize the
process administered by HHS, and the
Exchange call center and Internet Web
site provide information to assist
consumers regarding the exemption
eligibility process.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
g. Reporting (§ 155.630)
In § 155.630, we proposed to codify
the provisions specified in section
1311(d)(4)(I)(i) of the Affordable Care
Act regarding reporting by the Exchange
to IRS regarding eligibility
determinations for exemptions. If the
Exchange grants an individual a
certificate of exemption in accordance
with § 155.610(i), we proposed that the
Exchange will transmit to IRS the
individual’s name and SSN, exemption
certificate number, and any additional
information specified in additional
guidance published by IRS in
accordance with 26 CFR 601.601(d)(2).
We solicited comments as to how this
interaction could work as smoothly as
possible.
Comment: One commenter raised
concerns about the lack of an IRS
interface to report exemptions, and
wanted HHS to ensure that Exchanges
will be provided sufficient time to
implement such an interface.
Response: We recognize the
commenter’s concerns regarding the
reporting process for exemptions. HHS
continues to work closely with the IRS
to ensure an efficient interface to report
exemptions, and anticipates releasing
technical guidance on this shortly. We
also anticipate that this reporting will be
accomplished through a monthly file,
which will be sent to IRS for the first
time in February, 2014, and will also
incorporate information regarding
enrollment in a QHP through the
Exchange and advance payments of the
premium tax credit, based on other
provisions.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Comment: One commenter
recommended that HHS provide
Exchanges flexibility to obtain and
report taxpayer identification numbers,
if relevant, rather than only SSNs as
proposed. The commenter also wanted
to ensure that this provision explicitly
specifies that Exchanges will comply
with existing confidentiality protections
for individual tax information under the
Affordable Care Act and section 6103 of
the Code.
Response: We maintain the language
of the proposed regulation. We also note
that in response to this comment, in
order to limit the administrative burden
on Exchanges associated with reporting
to IRS, we have clarified in § 155.615(k)
that similar to the coverage process, the
Exchange will validate application SSNs
that are included on an exemptions
application. Similar to eligibility for
enrollment in a QHP, having a SSN is
not a requirement to receiving an
exemption, and as such the inability to
validate a SSN will not preclude an
eligibility determination for an
exemption. However, the successful
validation of a SSN will help in the
efficient administration of the tax filing
process. Furthermore, we note that 45
CFR 155.260 specifies that tax
information will be protected in
accordance with section 6103 of the
Code.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions
proposed in § 155.630 of the proposed
rule without modification.
h. Right To Appeal (§ 155.635)
In § 155.635, we proposed that the
Exchange will include notice of the
right to appeal and instructions for how
to appeal in any notification issued in
accordance with § 155.610(i) and
§ 155.625(b)(1). We proposed that an
individual may appeal any eligibility
determination or redetermination made
by the Exchange in relation to an
exemption. Additional detail about the
appeal process is described in subpart F
of the proposed rule titled, ‘‘Medicaid,
Children’s Health Insurance Programs,
and Exchanges: Essential Health
Benefits in Alternative Benefit Plans,
Eligibility Notices, Fair Hearing and
Appeal Processes for Medicaid and
Exchange Eligibility Appeals and Other
Provisions Related to Eligibility and
Enrollment for Exchanges, Medicaid
and CHIP, and Medicaid Premiums and
Cost Sharing’’ (78 FR 4719).
Comment: One commenter expressed
concerns about individuals with access
to eligible employer-sponsored coverage
that would prevent an individual from
receiving advance payments of the
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
premium tax credit, while still leaving
them subject to the shared responsibility
payment. The commenter wanted the
Exchange to have discretion through the
appeals process to consider the totality
of an applicant’s circumstances.
Another commenter urged HHS to
specify that translation services are
available for LEP individuals to ensure
they have appropriate access to the
appeals process, including the content
of notices and requests for hearings.
Response: Comments concerning the
appeals process for exemptions will be
addressed in future rulemaking.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions
proposed in § 155.635 of the proposed
rule with three modifications. First, we
are deleting the reference to
§ 155.625(b)(1), as we are modifying
proposed § 155.625 to specify that an
Exchange that relies on HHS to make
eligibility determinations for
exemptions will not issue the eligibility
notice. Second, we also make a
technical correction in paragraph (b) to
replace the reference to the
Commissioner of the IRS with the
Secretary of the Treasury. Third, we
make a technical correction to remove
the introductory text, which is not
substantive.
B. Part 156—Health Insurance Issuer
Standards Under the Affordable Care
Act, Including Standards Related to
Exchanges
a. Definition of Minimum Essential
Coverage (§ 156.600)
The proposed rule cross referenced
the Treasury regulation under section
5000A of the Code for the definition of
minimum essential coverage.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We made minor changes to the
provisions of § 156.600 to clarify the
meaning of the final rule.
b. Other Types of Coverage That Qualify
as Minimum Essential Coverage
(§ 156.602)
The proposed rule specifically
designated the following types of
coverage as minimum essential coverage
for purposes of the Code: Self-funded
student health insurance plans; foreign
health coverage; Refugee Medical
Assistance supported by the
Administration for Children and
Families (45 CFR Part 400 Subpart G);
Medicare advantage plans; AmeriCorps
coverage (45 CFR 2522.10 through
2522.950), and state high risk pools (as
defined in § 2744 of the Public Health
Service Act (PHS Act)). We solicited
comments on these types of coverage
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
and whether there are other existing
categories of coverage that should be
recognized as minimum essential
coverage. We also solicited comments
regarding whether self-funded student
health coverage should be limited to
institutions of higher education, as
defined by the Higher Education Act of
1965, or if coverage offered by other
institutions, such as primary or
secondary educational institution, or
unaccredited educational institutions,
should be included. Lastly, we solicited
comments on the inclusion of
AmeriCorps coverage in the designated
list.
Under the proposed rule, state high
risk pools were designated as minimum
essential coverage for a period of time
to be determined by the Secretary. We
reserved the right to review and monitor
the extent and quality of coverage, and
in the future to reassess whether they
should be designated minimum
essential coverage or should be required
to go through the process outlined in
§ 156.604 of this proposed rule. We
solicited comments on whether state
high risk pools should automatically be
designated as minimum essential
coverage or whether they should be
required to follow the process outlined
in § 156.604 of this proposed rule.
The comments and our responses are
set forth below.
Comment: Many commenters were
concerned that the unregulated status of
self-funded student health coverage may
leave students unable to benefit from
the protections of the Affordable Care
Act, and that students who are offered
a self-funded plan through their college
or university may find it difficult or
impossible to obtain coverage through
the Exchanges and to access the
Affordable Care Act premium and costsharing subsidies. These commenters
conceded that some self-funded student
health coverage is good coverage, but
other plans do not provide adequate
coverage. These commenters
specifically cited annual and lifetime
limits, prescription drug limits, preexisting condition exclusions and
rescissions as reasons that some selffunded student health coverage is not
satisfactory coverage for many students.
In contrast, other commenters stated
their support for designating self-funded
student health coverage as minimum
essential coverage, citing the ACHA
guidelines document, Standards for
Student Health Insurance/Benefits
Programs, which will ‘‘encourage
provision of benefits in self-funded
plans that are consistent with
Affordable Care Act requirements that
have been established for student
insured plans.’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Response: After reviewing the
comments regarding designating selffunded student health plans as
minimum essential coverage for
purposes of the Code, we agree that
because self-funded student health
plans can be varied in the types of
benefits being provided, these plans
should not be permanently designated
as minimum essential coverage. In this
final rule we designate self-funded
student health coverage as minimum
essential coverage for plan or policy
years beginning on or before December
31, 2014. For coverage beginning after
December 31, 2014, sponsors of selffunded student health plans may apply
to be recognized as minimum essential
coverage through the process outlined
in § 156.604 of the final rule. In
addition, the Department of the
Treasury intends to publish guidance
under section 36B of the Code about
whether individuals who are eligible to
enroll in self-funded student health
plans will be treated as eligible for
qualified health plan coverage
subsidized by the premium tax credit.
In the proposed rule we designated
state high risk pools as minimum
essential coverage for a transition period
and solicited comments on whether
state high risk pools should be
recognized as minimum essential
coverage. We did not receive any
comments on state high risk pools and
we are finalizing the proposed rule. To
be consistent with the treatment of selffunded student health plans which
under the final rule are designated as
minimum essential coverage for plan or
policy years beginning on or before
December 31, 2014, we are applying the
same one-year transitional period to
state high risk pools. For coverage
beginning after December 31, 2014,
sponsors of state high risk pools may
apply to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage through the process
outlined in § 156.604 of the final rule.
In addition, the Department of the
Treasury intends to publish guidance
under section 36B of the Code about
whether individuals who are eligible to
enroll in state high risk pools will be
treated as eligible for qualified health
plan coverage subsidized by the
premium tax credit.
Comment: Some commenters
supported the designation of foreign
health coverage as minimum essential
coverage because foreign health
coverage provides meaningful health
care benefits to, legally admitted, noncitizens temporarily working in the
United States. Other commenters
expressed concern that foreign health
coverage, which is generally provided to
non-citizens by a foreign home country
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39515
or through foreign commercial health
coverage, provides limited or no out-ofcountry benefits to such persons while
legally in the United States.
Response: We agree that the health
care benefits provided by foreign
governments or through foreign
insurance for legally admitted noncitizens of the United States vary from
country to country and may create a
barrier to care if health care providers in
the United States do not accept payment
from such coverage. Therefore, foreign
health coverage is not designated as
minimum essential coverage in this
final rule. However, sponsors of foreign
health coverage may apply for their
coverage to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage in the process
outlined in § 156.604 of this final rule.
Comment: Some commenters
supported the designation of coverage
provided by AmeriCorps programs to
their AmeriCorps members as minimum
essential coverage. They stated that the
lack of an employer/employee
relationship creates difficulties for
programs seeking insurance on their
own through traditional group
insurance markets. Further, coverage
provided by AmeriCorps programs to
their AmeriCorps members has
produced economies of scale and a
solution to the accessibility challenges
particular to smaller programs.
Commenters also stated that the
demographics and full funding of
premiums by the program has led to
stable claims experience.
Other commenters opposed
designating the coverage provided by
AmeriCorps programs to AmeriCorps
volunteers as minimum essential
coverage because some of the provided
benefits fall below the minimal coverage
requirements required by the Affordable
Care Act. In addition, commenters noted
that stipends for most volunteers are
between 100–200 percent FPL, meaning
that they may either qualify for a
premium assistance program or a
hardship exemption.
Response: In response to these
comments concerning consumer
protections, the final rule does not
automatically designate coverage
provided by AmeriCorps programs to
AmeriCorps volunteers as minimum
essential coverage. However,
AmeriCorps coverage provided to
volunteers may be recognized as
minimum essential coverage through
the certification process outlined in
§ 156.604 of this final rule.
Comment: Several commenters urged
HHS to recognize multi-share plans as
minimum essential coverage. These
commenters also requested that if multishare plans were not designated as
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39516
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
minimum essential coverage, that they
be eligible to apply for recognition as
minimum essential coverage. These
commenters described the unique
structure of multi-share plans, stating
that these programs already meet the
community needs of affordable health
insurance; multi-share programs often
focus on specific geographic areas or
populations; and that multi-share plans
are community funded, receive no
federal subsidies and are a
demonstrated alternative to traditional
health insurance. Multi-share plans are
designed to be coverage of last resort for
low-income small businesses, students
and individuals when other programs
are unavailable.
Response: While multi-share plans are
not designated as minimum essential
coverage in this final rule, HHS invites
all multi-share organizations to apply
for their coverage to be recognized as
minimum essential coverage in the
process outlined in § 156.604 of this
final rule.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Summary of Regulatory Changes
As proposed in the proposed rule, in
§ 156.602 we designate Medicare
Advantage, and Refugee Medical
Assistance supported by the
Administration for Children and
Families (45 CFR Subpart G), as
minimum essential coverage. We also
designate self-funded student health
plans and state high risk pools as
minimum essential coverage for plan or
policy years beginning on or before
December 31, 2014. For coverage
beginning after December 31, 2014,
sponsors of self-funded student health
plans and state high risk pools may
apply to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage through the process
outlined in § 156.604 of the final rule.
Section 156.602 no longer specifically
designates foreign health coverage or
coverage provided by AmeriCorps
programs to AmeriCorps volunteers as
minimum essential coverage. However,
plans that provide coverage to
AmeriCorps volunteers as well as
coverage provided by foreign
governments may receive designation as
minimum essential coverage by
following the process for recognition
explained in § 156.604.
c. Requirements for Recognition as
Minimum Essential Coverage for Types
of Coverage Not Otherwise Designated
Minimum Essential Coverage in the
Statute or This Regulation (§ 156.604)
The proposed rule outlined a process
by which other types of coverage could
seek to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage. Coverage recognized
as minimum essential coverage through
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
this process would need to offer
substantially the same consumer
protections as those enumerated in the
Title I of Affordable Care Act relating to
non-grandfathered, individual coverage
to ensure consumers are receiving the
protections of the Affordable Care Act.
We solicited comments on the proposed
‘‘substantially comply’’ standard as it
applies to other types of individual
coverage. We also solicited comments
on the process for recognizing other
coverage as minimum essential
coverage.
In the proposed regulation, sponsors
of minimum essential coverage must
also meet other criteria specified by the
Secretary. We solicited comments on
the types of criteria the Secretary should
consider in this process as well as
whether they should be added to the
final rule. We proposed that sponsors of
a plan that seeks to have such coverage
recognized as minimum essential
coverage adhere to certain procedures.
Sponsors would submit to HHS
electronically the following information:
(1) Name of the organization sponsoring
the plan; (2) name and title of the
individual who is authorized to make,
and makes, this certification on behalf
of the organization; (3) address of the
individual named above; (4) phone
number of the individual named above;
(5) number of enrollees; (6) eligibility
criteria; (7) cost sharing requirements,
including deductible and out-of-pocket
maximum; (8) essential health benefits
covered (as defined in § 1302(b) of the
Affordable Care Act and its
implementing regulations); and (9) a
certification that the plan substantially
complies with the provisions of Title I
of the Affordable Care Act as applicable
to non-grandfathered individual health
insurance coverage. If at any time HHS
determines that a type of coverage
previously recognized as minimum
essential coverage no longer meets the
coverage requirements, HHS may revoke
the recognition of such coverage. We
solicited comments on whether there
should be an appeal process for
sponsors of coverage that had the
minimum essential coverage status
revoked by the Secretary. We also
solicited comment on whether this
appeal process should be available to
sponsors whose initial request for
recognition of minimal essential
coverage status for their coverage was
denied by HHS.
The comment and our response are
set forth below.
Comment: A commenter suggested
that the process for designating coverage
not otherwise designated as minimum
essential coverage should include
definitive timelines for the submission
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
and consideration of each plan applying
to be designated at minimum essential
coverage, opportunities for such plans
to exchange ideas with HHS, and an
appeals process for plans that are
denied.
Response: We appreciate the
commenter’s suggestions regarding this
process and we will take them under
further consideration while developing
this administrative process.
As previously stated, we solicited
comments on the types of criteria that
the Secretary should require a sponsor
to meet in order for HHS to recognize
the coverage of the organization as
minimum essential coverage and
indicated that we might specify criteria
for sponsoring organizations. We did
not get any comments specifically
addressing this issue, and we have
decided that the focus of the CMS
review of applications for health
coverage to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage will not be on the
type of organization providing coverage
but on the extent of the coverage itself
and the protections provided in the
coverage. We made minor changes to
certification requirement to clarify that
the organization must certify that the
coverage substantially complies with
the requirements of title I of the
Affordable Care Act that apply to nongrandfathered plans in the individual
market and the organization must
submit any plan documentation or other
information that demonstrate that the
coverage substantially comply with
these requirements.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We made minor changes to the
provisions of § 156.604 to clarify that, in
addition to the organization certifying
that the coverage substantially complies
with the requirements of title I of the
Affordable Care Act that apply to nongrandfathered plans in the individual
market, the organization must submit
any plan documentation or other
information that demonstrates that the
coverage substantially complies with
these requirements.
d. HHS Audit Authority (§ 156.606)
Under this proposed rule, HHS would
have the ability to audit plans to ensure
the accuracy of the certification either
randomly or when triggered by certain
information. We solicited comments on
the proposed procedures and if and
when audits should be conducted. We
also solicited comments on whether
sponsors of the types of coverage that
have been designated as minimum
essential coverage in the proposed rule
should also submit the above
information required to HHS.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Under the proposed rule, once
recognized as minimum essential
coverage, a plan would have to provide
notice to its enrollees, specifying that
the plan has been recognized as
minimum essential coverage for the
purposes of the individual shared
responsibility provision. The sponsor of
any plan recognized as minimum
essential coverage would also be
required to provide the annual
information reporting to the IRS
specified in section 6055 of the Code
and implementing regulations and
furnish statements to individuals
enrolled in such coverage to assist them
in establishing that they are not liable
for the shared responsibility payment
under section 5000A of the Code. We
requested comments on whether all
plans and programs designated as
minimum essential coverage under this
regulation must provide notice to
enrollees, or only plans recognized
through the process in § 156.604 of this
regulation.
Comment: A commenter suggested
that the process for designating coverage
not otherwise designated as minimum
essential coverage should include
definitive timelines for the submission
and consideration of each plan applying
to be designated at minimum essential
coverage, opportunities for such plans
to exchange ideas with HHS, and an
appeals process for plans that are
denied.
Response: We appreciate the
commenter’s suggestions regarding this
process and we will take them under
further consideration while developing
this administrative process.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We made minor changes to the
provisions of section 156.606 to clarify
the meaning of the final regulation.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
III. Provisions of the Final Regulation
For the most part, this final rule
incorporates the provisions of the
proposed rule. Those provisions of this
final rule that differ substantively from
the proposed rule are as follows:
Changes to § 155.605
• Modifies eligibility standards for
the religious conscience exemption such
that if an exemption is provided to an
individual under the age of 21, an
exemption will be provided on a
continuing basis until the month after
the individual’s 21st birthday, which
triggers a corresponding notice and
opportunity for the individual turning
21 to file another application to
maintain this exemption.
• Clarifies which hardship
exemptions must be granted by the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Exchange and which are available solely
through the tax filing process.
• Clarifies that hardship exemption
under paragraph (g)(1) of this section
must be granted for the month before,
the month or months during which an
individual experiences the
circumstances that qualify as a hardship
preventing him or her from purchasing
a qualified health plan, and the month
after.
• Clarifies that an eligible employersponsored plan is only considered for
the lack of affordable coverage based on
projected income hardship exemption if
it meets the minimum value standard.
• Specifies how the Exchange will
determine the required contribution to
purchase coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan or in the
individual market for the lack of
affordable coverage based on projected
income hardship exemption, including
clarifying that in determining the
required contribution for an eligible
employer-sponsored plan, an individual
who uses tobacco is treated as not
earning any premium incentive related
to participation in a wellness program
designed to prevent or reduce tobacco
use that is offered by an eligible
employer-sponsored plan, and wellness
incentives offered by an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that do not
relate to tobacco use are treated as not
earned.
• Clarifies that the lack of affordable
coverage based on projected income
hardship exemption is only available
prospectively for the month or months
of a calendar year after which the
exemption is requested, and that it will
be provided for all remaining months in
a coverage year, notwithstanding any
change in an individual’s
circumstances.
• Adds a hardship exemption for any
month in which an individual is an
Indian eligible for services through an
Indian health care provider, as defined
in 42 CFR 447.50, or an individual
eligible for services through the Indian
Health Service in accordance with 25
USC 1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3), and
specifies that the duration of this
exemption is the same as that for a
member of an Indian tribe.
Changes to § 155.610
• Clarifies that the Exchange must use
information collected for purposes of
the eligibility determination for
enrollment in a QHP and for insurance
affordability programs in making the
exemption eligibility determination to
the extent that the Exchange finds that
such information is still applicable.
• Specifies that at a minimum, the
Exchange must provide a paper
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39517
application process for applications
submitted prior to October 15, 2014.
• Clarifies that hardship exemptions
can also be provided for previous tax
years after December 31 of a given
calendar year, noting that the Exchange
will only accept an application for an
exemption described in § 155.605(g)(1)
during one of the 3-calendar years after
the month or months during which the
applicant attests that the hardship
occurred.
• Clarifies that the Exchange will
notify an individual to retain records
that demonstrate the receipt of a
certificate of exemption, as well as
records demonstrating his or her
qualification for the underlying
exemption.
Changes to § 155.615
• Clarifies how the Exchange will
address a situation in which an
applicant attests to membership in a
religious sect or division that is not
recognized under section 1402(g)(1) of
the Code.
• Clarifies how the Exchange will
address a situation in which an
applicant attests to membership in an
organization that is not known to the
Exchange as a health care sharing
ministry based on information provided
by HHS.
• Provides a process for establishing
the list of health care sharing ministries
that meet the statutory standards.
• Clarifies that the Exchange will not
find that an applicant’s previous or
current enrollment in health coverage is
not reasonably compatible with his or
her attestation of membership in a
health care sharing ministry.
• Clarifies that the Secretary of the
Treasury will administer the
exemptions specified in § 155.605(g)(3)
and (5).
• Clarifies the applicability of
verification procedures specified in 45
CFR subpart D to the lack of affordable
coverage based on projected income
hardship exemption.
• Specifies that the Exchange will use
the same verification procedures for the
exemption for an individual who is
eligible for services through an Indian
health care provider as it will use for the
exemption for members of a federallyrecognized tribe.
• Clarifies when an inconsistency
process should be triggered when
certain data sources are not reasonably
expected to be available.
• Allows an applicant 90 days to
present satisfactory documentary
evidence to resolve an inconsistency.
• Specifies how an Exchange must
validate a Social Security number for an
individual seeking an exemption.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39518
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Changes to § 155.620
Changes to § 156.604
• Specifies that the Exchange will not
conduct mid-year redeterminations for
the hardship exemption for an
individual who has a lack of affordable
coverage based on projected household
income, will not require individuals
receiving this exemption to report
changes, and will not send periodic
reminders to report changes to
individuals who have this exemption.
• Specifies that the Exchange will
implement a change resulting from a
redetermination under this section for
the month or months after the month in
which the redetermination occurs, such
that a certificate that was provided for
the month in which the redetermination
occurs, and for prior months remains
effective.
• Makes minor changes to the
provisions of § 156.604 to clarify the
meaning of the regulation.
Changes to § 155.625
• Specifies that for applications
submitted before October 15, 2014, a
state-based Exchange can be approved if
relying on HHS to administer the entire
eligibility process for exemptions,
provided that the Exchange furnishes
any information available through the
Exchange that is necessary for an
applicant to utilize the process
administered by HHS, and the Exchange
call center and Internet Web site assist
consumers seeking exemptions.
Changes to § 155.635
• Clarifies that an Exchange relying
on HHS to make eligibility
determinations for exemptions will not
issue the eligibility notice for
applications submitted prior to October
15, 2014.
Changes to § 156.600
• Makes minor changes to the
provisions of 45 CFR § 156.600 to clarify
the meaning of the regulation.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Changes to § 156.602
• Designates self-funded student
health plans and state high risk pools as
minimum essential coverage for a one
year transitional period, and allows selffunded student health plans and state
high risk pools to apply to be recognized
as minimum essential coverage through
the process outlined in § 156.604 of the
final rule after January 1, 2015.
• Removes the designation of foreign
health coverage and AmeriCorps as
minimum essential coverage. In order to
be recognized as minimum essential
coverage, foreign health coverage and
coverage for AmeriCorps must follow
the process for recognition explained in
§ 156.604.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
21:33 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Changes to § 156.606
• Makes minor changes to the
provisions of 45 CFR § 156.606 to clarify
the meaning of the regulation.
IV. Collection of Information
Requirements
The final rule entitled ‘‘Exchange
Functions: Eligibility for Exemptions;
Miscellaneous Minimum Essential
Coverage Provisions’’ finalizes
standards with regard to the minimum
function of an Exchange to perform
eligibility determinations and issue
certificates of exemption from the
individual shared responsibility
payment. The rule also finalizes
standards related to eligibility for
exemptions, including the verification
and eligibility determination process,
eligibility redeterminations, options for
conducting eligibility determinations,
and reporting related to exemptions. In
addition, the rule finalizes rules
designating certain types of coverage as
minimum essential coverage and
outlining substantive and procedural
requirements that other types of
coverage must fulfill in order to be
recognized as minimum essential
coverage under section 5000A(f)(5) of
the Code.
This section outlines the information
collection requirements in the proposed
regulation on which we solicited public
comment in the exemptions proposed
rule. We used data from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics to derive average costs
for all estimates of salary in establishing
the information collection requirements.
Salary estimates included the cost of
fringe benefits, calculated at 30.4
percent of salary, which is based on the
June 2012 Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation report by the U.S. Bureau
of Labor Statistics. Additionally, we
used estimates from the Congressional
Budget Office to derive estimates of the
number of exemption applications we
anticipate Exchanges to receive, and the
number of exemption eligibility
determination notifications we
anticipate Exchanges to generate.
Finally, this final rule describes an
information collection requirement for
which we did not solicit public
comment in the exemptions proposed
rule. The information collection
requirement related to Health Care
Sharing Ministries will be addressed
through a separate notice and comment
process under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1. Exemption Application (§ 155.610)
Throughout this subpart, we specify
that the Exchange will collect
attestations from applicants for a
certificate of exemption. These
attestations will be collected using the
application described in § 155.610(a). In
§ 155.610(a), we provide that the
Exchange use an application created by
HHS to collect the information
necessary for determining eligibility for
and granting certificates of exemption
from the individual shared
responsibility payment. The burden
associated with this requirement is the
time and effort estimated for an
applicant to complete an application.
The exemption application may be
available in both paper and electronic
formats. An electronic application
process would vary depending on each
applicant’s circumstances and which
exemption an applicant is applying for,
such that an applicant is only presented
with questions relevant to the
exemption for which he or she is
applying. The goal is to solicit sufficient
information so that in most cases no
further inquiry will be needed. We
estimate that on average, it will take .27
hours (16 minutes) for an application
filer to complete an application, which
is based on the estimates created for the
single, streamlined application for
enrollment in a QHP 3, with a 90 percent
electronic/10 percent paper mix (noting
that no specific application channel is
specified in this proposed rule). While
the Congressional Budget Office 4
estimates that 24 million individuals
would be exempt from the individual
shared responsibility payment in 2016,
it is unclear how many individuals will
seek these exemptions from an
Exchange. Some of these individuals
will claim an exemption through the tax
filing process, others will be exempt but
not need to file for an exemption (for
example those below the filing
threshold), while others will apply for
and receive an exemption through the
Exchange. Therefore, of the 24 million
individuals, we conservatively
anticipate that up to half will apply for
an exemption through the Exchange. We
specifically sought comment on this
assumption. Accordingly, we estimate
that approximately 12 million
3 The estimates may be found in the information
collection request entitled, ‘‘Data Collection to
Support Eligibility Determinations for Insurance
Affordability Programs and Enrollment through
Affordable Insurance Exchanges, Medicaid and
Children’s Health Insurance Program Agencies.’’
4 Congressional Budget Office, ‘‘Payments of
Penalties for Being Uninsured Under the Affordable
Care Act,’’ September 2012 https://cbo.gov/sites/
default/files/cbofiles/attachments/09-19-12Indiv_Mandate_Penalty.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
applications for exemptions will be
submitted to the Exchange for calendar
year 2016, for a total of 3.2 million
burden hours. We note, however, that
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
saw a very small number of individuals
apply for exemptions from a similar
individual shared responsibility
payment 5. We also note that some
individuals will apply for an exemption
but be determined ineligible for an
exemption, but it is difficult for us to
estimate this number, and that in an
unknown number of cases, multiple
individuals in a single household may
submit a single application.
We do not estimate any cost to the
Exchanges of evaluating the exemption
applications. For the purposes of this
estimate, we expect all applications to
be submitted electronically and
processed through the system, which
would result in no additional labor costs
to evaluate and review the exemption
applications. We requested comment on
this assumption.
We estimate that the cost to develop
the exemption application will be
significantly less than the estimated cost
of developing the coverage application
because the coverage application takes
into account additional factors
necessary in order to perform eligibility
determinations for insurance
affordability programs. We also note
that as with the coverage application,
HHS will be releasing a model
application for use by Exchanges, which
will significantly decrease the burden
associated with the implementation of
the application. On average, we estimate
that the implementation of the
exemption application will take
approximately 1,059 hours of software
development at a labor cost of $98.50
per hour, for a total cost of $104,312 per
Exchange and a total cost of $1,877,607
for 18 state-based Exchanges.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
2. Notices (§§ 155.610, 155.615,
155.620)
Several provisions in subpart G
outline specific notices that the
Exchange will send to individuals
during the exemption eligibility
determination process, including the
notice of eligibility determination
described in § 155.610(i). The purpose
of these notices is to alert an applicant
of his or her eligibility determination for
an exemption and related actions taken
by the Exchange. To the extent that an
applicant is determined eligible for an
exemption, the notice of eligibility
5 Massachusetts Health Connector and
Department of Revenue, ‘‘Data on the Individual
Mandate, Tax Year 2010’’, June, 2012. Retrieved
from https://www.mahealthconnector.org.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
determination described in § 155.610(i)
will serve as the certificate of
exemption. Accordingly, we do not
provide a separate burden estimate for
the certificates of exemption described
throughout this subpart. When possible,
we anticipate that the Exchange will
consolidate notices when multiple
members of a household are applying
together and receive an eligibility
determination at the same time.
Consistent with 45 CFR 155.230(d), the
notice may be in paper or electronic
format, based on the election of an
individual, will be in writing, and will
be sent after an eligibility determination
has been made by the Exchange; these
are the same standards that are used for
eligibility notices for enrollment in a
QHP through the Exchange and for
insurance affordability programs, as
described in 45 CFR 155.310(g). It is
difficult to estimate the number of
applicants that will opt for electronic
versus paper notices, although we
anticipate that a large volume of
applicants will request electronic
notification. We estimated the
associated mailing costs for the time and
effort needed to mail notices in bulk to
applicants who request paper notices.
We expect that the exemption
eligibility determination notice will be
dynamic and include information
tailored to all possible outcomes of an
application throughout the eligibility
determination process. A health policy
analyst, senior manager, and an attorney
would review the notice. HHS is
currently developing model notices,
which will decrease the burden on
Exchanges associated with developing
such notices. If a state opts to use the
model notices provided by HHS, we
estimate that the Exchange effort related
to the development and implementation
of the exemption eligibility
determination notice will necessitate 44
hours from a health policy analyst at an
hourly cost of $49.35 to learn
exemptions rules and draft notice text;
20 hours from an attorney at an hourly
cost of $90.14, and four hours from a
senior manager at an hourly cost of
$79.08 to review the notice; and 32
hours from a computer programmer at
an hourly cost of $52.50 to conduct the
necessary development. In total, we
estimate that this will take a total of 100
hours for each Exchange, at a cost of
approximately $5,971 per Exchange and
a total cost of $107,469 for 18 statebased Exchanges. For most notices
outlined in subpart G of this proposed
rule, we estimate that the notice
development as outlined in the
paragraph above, including the systems
programming, would take each
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39519
Exchange an estimated 100 hours to
complete in the first year.
We expect that the burden on the
Exchange to maintain this notice will be
significantly lower than to develop it.
We estimate that it will take each
professional approximately a quarter of
the time to maintain the notice as
compared to developing the notice.
Accordingly, we estimate the
maintenance of the eligibility
determination notice in subsequent
years will necessitate 11 hours from a
health policy analyst at an hourly cost
of $49.35; 5 hours from an attorney at
an hourly cost of $90.14; one hour from
a senior manager at an hourly cost of
$79.08 and eight hours from a computer
programmer at an hourly cost of $52.50.
In total, we estimate that this will take
a total of 25 hours for each Exchange,
at a cost of approximately $1,492 per
Exchange and a total cost of $26,856 for
18 state-based Exchanges.
Pursuant to section 5000A of the
Code, the IRS must collect the necessary
data from QHP issuers to determine the
national average bronze monthly
premiums in order to assist in the
computation of the shared responsibility
payment. To assist the IRS, HHS must
request the monthly premium for all
bronze level QHP’s through all 51
Exchanges from QHP issuers. The
burden associated on states and QHP
issuers is already included in the
information collection request entitled,
‘‘Initial Plan Data Collection to Support
QHP Certification and other Financial
Management and Exchange
Operations,’’ and as such, we do not
include a separate burden estimate here.
As this information is already being
collected for another purpose, there will
be no additional burden on QHP issuers
or states.
3. Electronic Transmissions (§§ 155.615,
155.630)
Section 155.615 specifies that the
Exchange will utilize applicable
procedures established under subpart D
of the Exchange final rule in order to
obtain data through electronic data
sources for purposes of determining
eligibility for and granting certificates of
exemption. This involves the electronic
transmission of data through procedures
established under subpart D in order to
verify an applicant’s incarceration
status, to verify eligibility for qualifying
coverage in an eligible employersponsored plan, and to determine
eligibility for advance payments of the
premium tax credit. Section 155.615
also includes additional electronic
transmissions that are specific to the
eligibility process for exemptions,
including those related to health care
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39520
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
sharing ministries and religious
conscience. In section 155.630, we
proposed that the Exchange will provide
relevant information to IRS regarding
certificates of exemption for the
purposes of tax administration, such as
the name and other identifying
information for the individual who
received the exemption. As we expect
that these transmissions of information
will all be electronic, and through the
same channels used for reporting to IRS
established in § 155.340, we do not
anticipate for there to be any additional
burden other than that which is
required to design the overall eligibility
and enrollment system. We do not
provide a burden estimate for the
electronic transmissions, as the cost is
incorporated into the development of
the IT system for the Exchange
eligibility and enrollment system.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
4. Verification and Change Reporting
(§§ 155.615, 155.620)
The Exchange will use the same
verification processes for new
applications and for changes that are
reported during the year. This includes
the process for situations in which the
Exchange is unable to verify the
information necessary to determine an
applicant’s eligibility, which is
described in section 155.615(g). It is not
possible at this time to provide
estimates for the number of applicants
for whom additional information will be
required to complete an eligibility
determination, but we anticipate that
this number will decrease as applicants
become more familiar with the
eligibility process for exemptions and as
more data become available
electronically. As such, for now, we
estimate the burden associated with the
processing of documentation for one
submission from an applicant. We note
that the burden associated with this
provision is one hour for an individual
to collect and submit documentation,
and 12 minutes for eligibility support
staff at an hourly cost of $28.66 to
review the documentation, for a total
cost of $6 per document submission.
5. ICRs Regarding Health Care Sharing
Ministries (§ 155.615)
In order to facilitate the provision of
an exemption for membership in a
health care sharing ministry to the
members of such ministry, we specify in
§ 155.615(c)(2) that an organization that
believes that it meets the statutory
standards to be considered a health care
sharing ministry will submit certain
information to HHS. We are aware of
four organizations that have made
public statements regarding their status
as a health care sharing ministry. We
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
note that we will account for the
additional burden associated with
healthcare sharing ministries in a future
information collection request that will
go through the requisite notice and
comment period and subsequent OMB
review and approval process.
6. ICRs Regarding Agreements
(§ 155.625)
These provisions specify that an
Exchange that decides to utilize the
HHS service for making eligibility
determinations for exemptions for
application submitted on or after
October 15, 2014, will enter into a
written agreement with HHS. These
agreements are necessary to ensure that
the use of the service will minimize
burden on individuals, ensure prompt
determinations of eligibility without
undue delay, and provide for secure,
timely transfers of application
information.
The burden associated with these
provisions is the time and effort
necessary for the Exchange to establish
an agreement with HHS. We estimate
that the creation of the necessary
agreement will necessitate 35 hours
from a health policy analyst at an hourly
cost of $49.35, and 35 hours from an
operations analyst at an hourly cost of
$54.45 to develop the agreement; and 30
hours from an attorney at an hourly cost
of $90.14 and five hours from a senior
manager at an hourly cost of $79.14 to
review the agreement. For the purpose
of this estimate, we assume that the 18
state-based Exchanges will utilize the
HHS service for exemptions.
Accordingly, the total burden on the
Exchange associated with the creation of
the necessary agreement will be
approximately 105 hours and $6,733 per
Exchange, for a total cost of $121,194 for
18 Exchanges.
7. ICRs Regarding Minimum Essential
Coverage (§§ 156.604(a)(3), 156.604(d))
Organizations that currently provide
health coverage that are not statutorily
specified and not designated as
minimum essential coverage in this
regulation may submit a request to CMS
that their coverage be recognized as
minimum essential coverage. As
described in § 156.604(a)(3), sponsoring
organizations would have to
electronically submit to CMS
information regarding their plans and
certify that their plans meet
substantially all of the requirements in
the Title I of Affordable Care Act, as
applicable to non-grandfathered,
individual coverage. Some commenters
suggested that organizations submitting
such requests provide more information
regarding their plans rather than simply
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
certifying that their plans meet
substantially all of the requirements in
the Title I of Affordable Care Act. We
have revised the certification to request
plan documentation or other
information that demonstrate that the
coverage sponsored by the organization
substantially complies with the
provisions of Title I of the Affordable
Care Act applicable to nongrandfathered individual health
insurance coverage.
We sought comments on how many
organizations are likely to submit such
requests but did not receive any
information that would allow us to
estimate the number of requests. We
assume that at least 10 organizations
will submit such a request. The burden
associated with this certification
includes the time needed to collect and
input the necessary plan information,
and maintain a copy for recordkeeping
by clerical staff and for a manager and
legal counsel to review it and for a
senior executive to review and sign it.
The certification and attachments will
be submitted to CMS electronically at
minimal cost. We estimate that it will
take a combined total of 5.25 hours (4
hours for clerical staff at an hourly cost
of $30.64, 0.5 hours for a manager at an
hourly cost of $55.22, 0.5 hours for legal
counsel at an hourly cost of $83.10 and
0.25 hours for a senior executive at an
hourly cost of $112.43) to prepare and
submit the information and certification
to CMS and to retain a copy for
recordkeeping purposes. The total cost
for one organization is estimated to be
approximately $220. Therefore, the total
burden for 10 organizations will be 52.5
hours, with an equivalent cost of $2,200.
Section 156.604(d) specifies that
sponsoring organizations whose health
coverage are recognized as minimum
essential coverage will have to provide
a notice to enrollees informing them
that the plan has been recognized as
minimum essential coverage for the
purposes of the Code. The notice
requirement may be satisfied by
inserting a statement into existing plan
documents. Plan documents are usually
reviewed and updated annually before a
new plan year begins. Sponsoring
organizations may insert the statement
in their plan documents at that time at
minimal cost. Once the notice is
included in the plan documents the first
year, no additional cost will be incurred
in future years. Therefore this notice is
not subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995. Commenters suggested that
a sponsoring organization should be
required to provide a notice to enrollees
if its request is denied and its plan is not
recognized as minimum essential
coverage. To minimize the burden on
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
sponsoring organizations, we are not
requiring such a notice.
The sponsor of any type of coverage
recognized as minimum essential
coverage is also required to provide the
annual information reporting to the IRS
39521
Department of Treasury plans to publish
for public comment, in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the required
ICRs in the near future.
specified in section 6055 of the Code
and furnish statements to individuals
enrolled in such coverage to assist them
in establishing that they are not liable
for the shared responsibility payment
under section 5000A of the Code. The
TABLE 1—ANNUAL INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS
Number of
respondents
Burden per
response
(hours)
Number of
responses
Regulation section(s)
Description
§ 155.610 ...............................
§ 155.610 ...............................
§§ 155.610, 155.620 .............
§ 155.620 ...............................
§ 155.625 ...............................
§§ 156.604(a)(3) ....................
Application Development ..........................
Application Completion .............................
Notice Development and Maintenance ....
Change Reporting ....................................
Agreements ..............................................
Minimum Essential Coverage Certification.
18
12,000,000
18
1
18
10
18
12,000,000
18
1
18
10
1,059
0.27
125
0.2
105
5.25
Total ...............................
...................................................................
........................
........................
..........................
C. Submission of PRA-Related
Comments
We have submitted a copy of this final
rule to OMB for its review of the rule’s
information collection and
recordkeeping requirements. These
requirements are not effective until they
have been approved by OMB.
To obtain copies of the supporting
statement and any related forms for the
proposed paperwork collections
referenced above, access the CMS Web
site at https://www.cms.gov/Regulationsand-Guidance/Legislation/
PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRAListing.html, or call the Reports
Clearance Office at 410–786–1326.
V. Summary of Regulatory Impact
Statement
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
A. Summary
As stated earlier in this preamble, this
final rule implements certain functions
of the Exchanges. These specific
statutory functions include determining
eligibility for and granting certificates of
exemption from the individual shared
responsibility payment described in
section 5000A of the Internal Revenue
Code. Additionally, this final rule
implements the responsibility of the
Secretary of Health and Human
Services, in coordination with the
Secretary of the Treasury, to designate
other health benefits coverage as
minimum essential coverage by
designating certain coverage as
minimum essential coverage. It also
outlines substantive and procedural
requirements that other types of
individual coverage must fulfill in order
to be recognized as minimum essential
coverage under the Internal Revenue
Code.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
HHS has crafted this rule to
implement the protections intended by
Congress in an economically efficient
manner. We have examined the effects
of this rule as required by Executive
Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September
1993, Regulatory Planning and Review),
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96–354),
section 1102(b) of the Social Security
Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4), Executive
Order 13132 on Federalism, and the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C.
804(2)). In accordance with OMB
Circular A–4, CMS has quantified the
benefits, costs and transfers where
possible, and has also provided a
qualitative discussion of some of the
benefits, costs and transfers that may
stem from this final rule.
B. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735)
directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects; distributive impacts; and
equity). Executive Order 13563 (76 FR
3821, January 21, 2011) is supplemental
to and reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review as established in
Executive Order 12866.
Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
defines a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
as an action that is likely to result in a
final rule—(1) having an annual effect
on the economy of $100 million or more
in any one year, or adversely and
materially affecting a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition,
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Total annual
burden
(hours)
19,062
3,200,000
2,250
0.2
1,890
52.5
3,223,255
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local or tribal
governments or communities (also
referred to as ‘‘economically
significant’’); (2) creating a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfering
with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially altering
the budgetary impacts of entitlement
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA)
must be prepared for major rules with
economically significant effects ($100
million or more in any 1 year), and a
‘‘significant’’ regulatory action is subject
to review by the OMB. This rule has
been designated a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has
reviewed this final regulation pursuant
to the Executive Order.
1. Need for Regulatory Action
This final rule sets forth standards
and processes under which the
Exchange will conduct eligibility
determinations for and grant certificates
of exemption from the individual shared
responsibility payment. Furthermore, it
supports and complements rulemaking
conducted by the Secretary of the
Treasury with respect to section 5000A
of the Code, as added by section 1501(b)
of the Affordable Care Act. The intent of
this rule is to implement the relevant
provisions while continuing to afford
states substantial discretion in the
design and operation of an Exchange,
with greater standardization provided
where directed by the statute or where
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39522
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
there are compelling practical,
efficiency, or consumer protection
reasons. In addition, this final rule
provides standards for determining
whether certain other types of health
insurance coverage constitute minimum
essential coverage and procedures for
sponsors to follow for a plan to be
identified as minimum essential
coverage under section 5000A of the
Code. This rule also designates certain
types of existing health coverage as
minimum essential coverage. Other
types of coverage, not statutorily
specified and not designated as
minimum essential coverage in this
regulation, may be recognized as
minimum essential coverage if certain
substantive and procedural
requirements are met as set forth in this
rule.
2. Summary of Impacts
In developing this final rule, HHS
carefully considered its potential effects
including costs and benefits. Because of
data limitations, HHS did not attempt to
quantify the benefits, costs and transfers
resulting from this final rule.
Nonetheless, HHS was able to identify
several potential impacts which are
discussed qualitatively below.
The exemption provisions of this final
rule set forth how and what exemptions
can be received through the Exchange.
Given the statute, these rules would
generate exemption request activity; the
final rules could also potentially affect
the amount of shared responsibility
payments made in a given year and the
number of individuals who would
enroll in health insurance plans to avoid
shared responsibility payments. The
impact of the minimum essential
coverage provisions would be similar;
individuals whose coverage would be
designated minimum essential coverage,
under the authority of the Secretary of
Health and Human Services to designate
other health benefit coverage as
minimum essential coverage, would, in
the absence of the rule, pay shared
responsibility payments or switch
health insurance coverage so as not to
incur those penalties.
As noted in our discussion, above, of
information collection requirements,
while CBO estimates that 24 million
individuals would be exempt from the
penalty in 2016, it is unclear how many
individuals will seek these exemptions
from an Exchange. These submissions
would be associated with a variety of
effects, including: costs to Exchanges to
review the exemption requests; costs to
applicants to request exemptions and
retain documents; potential effects on
enrollment in health coverage and its
benefits; and a transfer from the federal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
government to individuals receiving
exemptions in cases in which there is a
foregone shared responsibility payment.
We note that the cost to an applicant
of submitting a request and retaining
documents is bounded by the expected
shared responsibility payment;
otherwise, he or she would not
necessarily apply for the exemption.
Though we lack data to precisely
characterize the effects of these
provisions, we note that the potential
number of individuals seeking
exemptions through the Exchange could
place the overall impact of the final rule
over the $100 million threshold for
economic significance, even at a low
economic cost per individual.
The minimum essential coverage
provisions included in this final rule
could lead to transfers from the federal
government to affected individuals (in
this case, individuals whose coverage is
designated to be minimum essential
coverage) and have effects on health
coverage enrollment (for example,
decreased switching between plans).
Decreased switching between plans
would entail time savings for affected
individuals and uncertain effects on
premium payments and use of medical
services and products. We currently
lack data to estimate the number of
individuals whose coverage would be
designated minimum essential coverage
by this rule.
C. Alternatives Considered
Under the Executive Order, HHS is
required to consider alternatives to
issuing rules and alternative regulatory
approaches. HHS considered the
regulatory alternatives below:
1. Grant Certificates for All Categories of
Exemptions
Section 155.605 provides the
eligibility standards for exemptions that
will be granted by the Exchange. The
preamble to this section notes that
Exchanges will not grant certificates of
exemption in four categories: (1) Lack of
affordable coverage; (2) household
income below the filing threshold; (3)
not lawfully present; and (4) short
coverage gaps. Also, Exchanges will not
grant certificates of exemptions for
certain hardship exemptions,
specifically § 155.605(g)(3) and (5).
These exemptions instead are solely
available during the tax filing process,
as we believe that the IRS is in a better
position to issue these exemptions.
The alternative model would specify
that the Exchange would provide
certificates of exemption in all nine
categories described in section 5000A of
the Code. This alternative model was
not selected for practical and
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
administrative reasons; the specific
reasons for taking this approach are
discussed in the preamble associated
with this section of the final regulation.
For example, for certain categories of
exemptions, the information needed
will only be available on a retrospective
basis, and is most efficiently available
through the tax filing process. Thus, we
believe that the least burdensome
approach for individuals and Exchanges
is to make these exemptions available
only through the tax filing process.
2. Designation of State High Risk Pools,
Self-Funded Student Health Plans and
AmeriCorps as Minimum Essential
Coverage
We considered designating state high
risk pools, self-funded student health
plans, foreign health coverage and
AmeriCorps as minimum essential
coverage in section 156.602. After
careful review of comments received,
state high risk pools and self-funded
student health plans will be designated
as minimum essential coverage for plan
or policy years beginning on or before
December 31, 2014. For coverage
beginning after December 31, selffunded student health plans and state
high risk pools may apply to be
recognized as minimum essential
coverage. HHS hopes that during this
transitional year, such plans will
voluntarily adopt Affordable Care Act
consumer protections to ensure their
qualification as minimum essential
coverage. We also considered
automatically designating AmeriCorps
and foreign health coverage as
minimum essential coverage but did not
adopt that policy in this final rule.
These types of coverage may be
recognized as minimum essential
coverage through the certification
process outlined in § 156.604 of this
final rule. We believe that the options
adopted in this final rule provide the
best balance between allowing
individuals to retain their current
coverage and ensuring that they receive
the consumer protections in the
Affordable Care Act.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) (RFA) requires
agencies to prepare an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis to describe the
impact of the rule on small entities,
unless the head of the agency can certify
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The Act
generally defines a ‘‘small entity’’ as (1)
a proprietary firm meeting the size
standards of the Small Business
Administration (SBA); (2) a not-for-
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
profit organization that is not dominant
in its field; or (3) a small government
jurisdiction with a population of less
than 50,000. States and individuals are
not included in the definition of ‘‘small
entity.’’ HHS uses as its measure of
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities a
change in revenues of more than 3 to 5
percent. As the burden for this final
regulation falls on either Exchanges or
individuals, the finalized regulations
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities, and therefore, a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
VII. Unfunded Mandates
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires that agencies assess anticipated
costs and benefits before issuing any
rule whose mandates require spending
in any 1 year of $100 million in 1995
dollars, updated annually for inflation,
by state, local, or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector. In
2013, that threshold is approximately
$141 million. This final rule does not
mandate expenditures by state
governments, local governments, tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the
private sector, of $141 million. The
majority of state, local, and private
sector costs related to implementation of
the Affordable Care Act were described
in the RIA accompanying the March
2012 Medicaid eligibility rule.
Furthermore, this final rule does not set
any mandate on states to set up an
Exchange.
VIII. Federalism
Executive Order 13132 establishes
certain requirements that an agency
must meet when it promulgates a final
rule that imposes substantial direct
effects on states, preempts state law, or
otherwise has federalism implications.
We note again that the impact of
changes related to implementation of
the Affordable Care Act was described
in the RIA associated with the Exchange
final rule. As discussed in the Exchange
final rule RIA, we have consulted with
states to receive input on how the
various Affordable Care Act provisions
codified in this proposed rule would
affect states.
Because states have flexibility in
designing their Exchange, state
decisions will ultimately influence both
administrative expenses and overall
premiums. However, because states are
not required to create an Exchange,
these costs are not mandatory. For states
electing to create an Exchange, the
initial costs of the creation of the
Exchange will be funded by Exchange
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Planning and Establishment Grants.
After this time, Exchanges will be
financially self-sustaining with revenue
sources left to the discretion of the state.
In the Department’s view, while this
proposed rule does not impose
substantial direct costs on state and
local governments, it has federalism
implications due to direct effects on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the state and
federal governments relating to
determining standards relating to health
insurance coverage (that is, for QHPs)
that is offered in the individual and
small group markets. Each state electing
to establish a state-based Exchange must
adopt the federal standards contained in
the Affordable Care Act and in this
proposed rule, or have in effect a state
law or regulation that implements these
federal standards. However, the
Department anticipates that the
federalism implications (if any) are
substantially mitigated because states
have choices regarding the structure and
governance of their Exchanges.
Additionally, the Affordable Care Act
does not require states to establish an
Exchange; but if a state elects not to
establish an Exchange or the state’s
Exchange is not approved, HHS, will
establish and operate an Exchange in
that state. Additionally, states will have
the opportunity to participate in state
Partnership Exchanges that would allow
states to leverage work done by other
states and the federal government, and
will be able to leverage a federallymanaged service for eligibility
determination for exemptions.
In compliance with the requirement
of Executive Order 13132 that agencies
examine closely any policies that may
have federalism implications or limit
the policy making discretion of the
states, the Department has engaged in
efforts to consult with and work
cooperatively with affected states,
including participating in conference
calls with and attending conferences of
the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners, and consulting with
state officials on an individual basis.
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in section 8(a) of Executive Order
13132, and by the signatures affixed to
this regulation, the Department certifies
that CMS has complied with the
requirements of Executive Order 13132
for the attached final regulation in a
meaningful and timely manner.
IX. Congressional Review Act
This rule is subject to the
Congressional Review Act provisions of
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.), which specifies that
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39523
before a rule can take effect, the federal
agency promulgating the rule shall
submit to each House of the Congress
and to the Comptroller General a report
containing a copy of the rule along with
other specified information, and has
been transmitted to the Congress and
the Comptroller General for review.
List of Subjects
45 CFR Part 155
Administrative practice and
procedure, Advertising, Brokers,
Conflict of interest, Consumer
protection, Grant programs—health,
Grants administration, Health care,
Health insurance, Health maintenance
organization (HMO), Health records,
Hospitals, Indians, Individuals with
disabilities, Loan programs-health,
Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Medicaid,
Public assistance programs, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
State and local governments, Technical
assistance, Women, and Youth.
45 CFR Part 156
Administrative practice and
procedure, Advertising, Advisory
committees, Brokers, Conflict of
interest, Consumer protection, Grant
programs—health, Grants
administration, Health care, Health
insurance, Health maintenance
organization (HMO), Health records,
Hospitals, Indians, Individuals with
disabilities, Loan programs-health,
Organization and functions
(Government agencies), Medicaid,
Public assistance programs, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
State and local governments, Sunshine
Act, Technical Assistance, Women, and
Youth.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Department of Health and
Human Services amends 45 CFR subtitle
A, subchapter B, as set forth below:
PART 155—EXCHANGE
ESTABLISHMENT STANDARDS AND
OTHER RELATED STANDARDS
UNDER THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT
1. The authority citation for part 155
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Title I of the Affordable Care
Act, sections 1301, 1302, 1303, 1304, 1311,
1312, 1313, 1321, 1322, 1331, 1334, 1402,
1411, 1412, 1413, Pub. L. 111–148, 124 Stat.
119 (42 U.S.C. 18021–18024, 18031–18033,
18041–18042, 18051, 18054, 18071, and
18081–18083.
2. Amend § 155.20 by revising the
introductory text to paragraph (1) for the
definition of ‘‘Applicant’’ and revising
the definition of ‘‘Application filer’’ to
read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39524
§ 155.20
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Definitions.
through an application submitted to the
Exchange.
Application filer means an applicant,
an individual who is liable for the
shared responsibility payment in
accordance with section 5000A of the
Code for an applicant, an authorized
representative, or if the applicant is a
minor or incapacitated, someone acting
responsibly for an applicant.
Exemption means an exemption from
the shared responsibility payment.
Health care sharing ministry has the
same meaning as it does in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
Indian tribe has the same meaning as
it does in section 45A(c)(6) of the Code.
Required contribution has the same
meaning as it does in section
5000A(e)(1)(B) of the Code.
Shared responsibility payment means
the payment imposed with respect to a
non-exempt individual who does not
maintain minimum essential coverage
in accordance with section 5000A(b) of
the Code.
Tax filer has the same meaning as it
does in § 155.300(a).
(b) Attestation. For the purposes of
this subpart, any attestation that an
applicant is to provide under this
subpart may be made by the application
filer on behalf of the applicant.
(c) Reasonably compatible. For
§ 155.200 Functions of an Exchange.
purposes of this subpart, the Exchange
(a) General requirements. The
must consider information through
Exchange must perform the minimum
electronic data sources, other
functions described in this subpart and
in subparts D, E, G, H, and K of this part. information provided by the applicant,
or other information in the records of
*
*
*
*
*
the Exchange to be reasonably
■ 4. Add subpart G to part 155 to read
compatible with an applicant’s
as follows:
attestation if the difference or
discrepancy does not impact the
Subpart G—Exchange Functions in the
Individual Market: Eligibility Determinations eligibility of the applicant for the
for Exemptions.
exemption or exemptions for which he
or she applied.
Sec.
(d) Accessibility. Information,
155.600 Definitions and general
including notices, forms, and
requirements.
155.605 Eligibility standards for
applications, must be provided to
exemptions.
applicants in accordance with the
155.610 Eligibility process for exemptions.
standards specified in § 155.205(c).
155.615 Verification process related to
(e) Notices. Any notice required to be
eligibility for exemptions.
sent by the Exchange to an individual in
155.620 Eligibility redeterminations for
accordance with this subpart must be
exemptions during a calendar year.
provided in accordance with the
155.625 Options for conducting eligibility
standards specified in § 155.230.
determinations for exemptions.
*
*
*
*
*
Applicant means:
(1) An individual who is seeking
eligibility for him or herself through an
application submitted to the Exchange,
excluding those individuals seeking
eligibility for an exemption from the
individual shared responsibility
payment pursuant to subpart G of this
part, or transmitted to the Exchange by
an agency administering an insurance
affordability program for at least one of
the following:
*
*
*
*
*
Application filer means an applicant,
an adult who is in the applicant’s
household, as defined in 42 CFR
435.603(f), or family, as defined in 26
CFR 1.36B–1(d), an authorized
representative of an applicant, or if the
applicant is a minor or incapacitated,
someone acting responsibly for an
applicant, excluding those individuals
seeking eligibility for an exemption
from the individual shared
responsibility payment pursuant to
subpart G of this part.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 155.200, revise paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
155.630
155.635
Reporting.
Right to appeal.
§ 155.605 Eligibility standards for
exemptions.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Subpart G—Exchange Functions in the
Individual Market: Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions
§ 155.600 Definitions and general
requirements.
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this
subpart, the following terms have the
following meaning:
Applicant means an individual who is
seeking an exemption for him or herself
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
(a) Eligibility for an exemption
through the Exchange. Except as
specified in paragraph (g) of this
section, the Exchange must determine
an applicant eligible for and issue a
certificate of exemption for any month
if the Exchange determines that he or
she meets the requirements for one or
more of the categories of exemptions
described in this section for at least one
day of the month.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(b) Duration of single exemption.
Except as specified in paragraphs (c)(2),
(f)(2), and (g) of this section, the
Exchange may provide a certificate of
exemption only for the calendar year in
which an applicant submitted an
application for such exemption.
(c) Religious conscience. (1) The
Exchange must determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption for any month
if the applicant is a member of a
recognized religious sect or division
described in section 1402(g)(1) of the
Code, and an adherent of established
tenets or teachings of such sect or
division, for such month in accordance
with section 5000A(d)(2)(A) of the Code.
(2) Duration of exemption for religious
conscience. (i) The Exchange must grant
the certificate of exemption specified in
this paragraph to an applicant who
meets the standards provided in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section for a
month on a continuing basis, until the
month after the month of the
individual’s 21st birthday, or until such
time that an individual reports that he
or she no longer meets the standards
provided in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section.
(ii) If the Exchange granted a
certificate of exemption in this category
to an applicant prior to his or her
reaching the age of 21, the Exchange
must send the applicant a notice upon
reaching the age of 21 informing the
applicant that he or she must submit a
new exemption application to maintain
the certificate of exemption.
(3) The Exchange must make an
exemption in this category available
prospectively or retrospectively.
(d) Membership in a health care
sharing ministry. (1) The Exchange must
determine an applicant eligible for an
exemption for a month if for such
month the applicant is a member of a
health care sharing ministry as defined
in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the
Code.
(2) The Exchange must make an
exemption in this category available
only retrospectively.
(e) Incarceration. (1) The Exchange
must determine an applicant eligible for
an exemption for a month if he or she
meets the standards in section
5000A(d)(4) of the Code for such month.
(2) The Exchange must make an
exemption in this category available
only retrospectively.
(f) Membership in an Indian tribe. (1)
The Exchange must determine an
applicant eligible for an exemption for
any month if he or she is a member of
an Indian tribe, as defined in section
45A(c)(6) of the Code, for such month,
as provided in section 5000A(e)(3) of
the Code.
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Duration of exemption for
membership in an Indian tribe. The
Exchange must grant the exemption
specified in this paragraph to an
applicant who meets the standards
specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section for a month on a continuing
basis, until such time that the applicant
reports that he or she no longer meets
the standards provided in paragraph
(f)(1) of this section.
(3) The Exchange must make an
exemption available in this category
prospectively or retrospectively.
(g) Hardship—(1) General. The
Exchange must grant a hardship
exemption to an applicant eligible for an
exemption for at least the month before,
a month or months during which, and
the month after, if the Exchange
determines that—
(i) He or she experienced financial or
domestic circumstances, including an
unexpected natural or human-caused
event, such that he or she had a
significant, unexpected increase in
essential expenses that prevented him
or her from obtaining coverage under a
qualified health plan;
(ii) The expense of purchasing a
qualified health plan would have
caused him or her to experience serious
deprivation of food, shelter, clothing or
other necessities; or
(iii) He or she has experienced other
circumstances that prevented him or her
from obtaining coverage under a
qualified health plan.
(2) Lack of affordable coverage based
on projected income. The Exchange
must determine an applicant eligible for
an exemption for a month or months
during which he or she, or another
individual the applicant attests will be
included in the applicant’s family, as
defined in 26 CFR 1.36B–1(d), is unable
to afford coverage in accordance with
the standards specified in section
5000A(e)(1) of the Code, provided that—
(i) Eligibility for this exemption is
based on projected annual household
income;
(ii) An eligible employer-sponsored
plan is only considered under
paragraphs (g)(2)(iii) and (iv) of this
section if it meets the minimum value
standard described in § 156.145 of this
subchapter.
(iii) For an individual who is eligible
to purchase coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan, the Exchange
determines the required contribution for
coverage such that—
(A) An individual who uses tobacco is
treated as not earning any premium
incentive related to participation in a
wellness program designed to prevent or
reduce tobacco use that is offered by an
eligible employer-sponsored plan;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
(B) Wellness incentives offered by an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that
do not relate to tobacco use are treated
as not earned;
(C) In the case of an employee who is
eligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan
sponsored by the employee’s employer,
the required contribution is the portion
of the annual premium that the
employee would pay (whether through
salary reduction or otherwise) for the
lowest cost self-only coverage.
(D) In the case of an individual who
is eligible to purchase coverage under
an eligible employer-sponsored plan as
a member of the employee’s family, as
defined in 26 CFR 1.36B–1(d), the
required contribution is the portion of
the annual premium that the employee
would pay (whether through salary
reduction or otherwise) for the lowest
cost family coverage that would cover
the employee and all other individuals
who are included in the employee’s
family who have not otherwise been
granted an exemption through the
Exchange.
(iv) For an individual who is
ineligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan, the
Exchange determines the required
contribution for coverage in accordance
with section 5000A(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the
Code, inclusive of all members of the
family, as defined in 26 CFR 1.36B–1(d),
who have not otherwise been granted an
exemption through the Exchange and
who are not treated as eligible to
purchase coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan, in accordance
with paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section;
and
(v) The applicant applies for this
exemption prior to the last date on
which he or she could enroll in a QHP
through the Exchange for the month or
months of a calendar year for which the
exemption is requested.
(vi) The Exchange must make an
exemption in this category available
prospectively, and provide it for all
remaining months in a coverage year,
notwithstanding any change in an
individual’s circumstances.
(3) Filing threshold. The IRS may
allow an applicant to claim an
exemption for a calendar year if he or
she was not required to file an income
tax return for such calendar year
because his or her gross income was
below the filing threshold, but who
nevertheless filed, claimed a dependent
with a filing requirement, and as a
result, had household income exceeding
the applicable return filing threshold
described in section 5000A(e)(2) of the
Code;
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39525
(4) Ineligible for Medicaid based on a
state’s decision not to expand. The
Exchange must determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption for a calendar
year if he or she has been determined
ineligible for Medicaid for one or more
months during the benefit year solely as
a result of a State not implementing
section 2001(a) of the Affordable Care
Act;
(5) Self-only coverage in an eligible
employer-sponsored plan. The IRS may
allow an applicant to claim an
exemption for a calendar year if he or
she, as well as one or more employed
members of his or her family, as defined
in 26 CFR 1.36B–1(d), has been
determined eligible for affordable selfonly employer-sponsored coverage
pursuant to section 5000A(e)(1) of the
Code through their respective employers
for one or more months during the
calendar year, but the aggregate cost of
employer-sponsored coverage for all the
employed members of the family
exceeds 8 percent of household income
for that calendar year; or
(6) Eligible for services through an
Indian health care provider. (i) The
Exchange must determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption for any month
if he or she is an Indian eligible for
services through an Indian health care
provider, as defined in 42 CFR 447.50
and not otherwise eligible for an
exemption under paragraph (f) of this
section, or an individual eligible for
services through the Indian Health
Service in accordance with 25 USC
1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3).
(ii) The Exchange must grant the
exemption specified in paragraph (g)(6)
of this section to an applicant who
meets the standards specified in
paragraph (g)(6) of this section for a
month on a continuing basis, until such
time that the applicant reports that he
or she no longer meets the standards
provided in paragraph (g)(6) of this
section.
§ 155.610 Eligibility process for
exemptions.
(a) Application. Except as specified in
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section,
the Exchange must use an application
established by HHS to collect
information necessary for determining
eligibility for and granting certificates of
exemption as described in § 155.605.
(b) Alternative application. If the
Exchange seeks to use an alternative
application, such application, as
approved by HHS, must request the
minimum information necessary for the
purposes identified in paragraph (a) of
this section.
(c) Exemptions through the eligibility
process for coverage. If an individual
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
39526
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
submits the application described in
§ 155.405 and then requests an
exemption, the Exchange must use
information collected for purposes of
the eligibility determination for
enrollment in a QHP and for insurance
affordability programs in making the
exemption eligibility determination, and
must not request duplicate information
or conduct repeat verifications to the
extent that the Exchange finds that such
information is still applicable, where
the standards for such verifications
adhere to the standards specified in this
subpart.
(d) Filing the exemption application.
The Exchange must—
(1) Accept the application from an
application filer; and
(2) Provide the tools to file an
application.
(3) For applications submitted before
October 15, 2014, the Exchange must, at
a minimum, accept the application by
mail.
(e) Collection of Social Security
Numbers. (1) The Exchange must
require an applicant who has a Social
Security number to provide such
number to the Exchange.
(2) The Exchange may not require an
individual who is not seeking an
exemption for himself or herself to
provide a Social Security number,
except as specified in paragraph (e)(3) of
this section.
(3) The Exchange must require an
application filer to provide the Social
Security number of a tax filer who is not
an applicant only if an applicant attests
that the tax filer has a Social Security
number and filed a tax return for the
year for which tax data would be
utilized for verification of household
income and family size for an
exemption under § 155.605(g)(2) that
requires such verification.
(f) Determination of eligibility;
granting of certificates. The Exchange
must determine an applicant’s eligibility
for an exemption in accordance with the
standards specified in § 155.605, and
grant a certificate of exemption to any
applicant determined eligible.
(g) Timeliness standards. (1) The
Exchange must determine eligibility for
exemption promptly and without undue
delay.
(2) The Exchange must assess the
timeliness of eligibility determinations
made under this subpart based on the
period from the date of application to
the date the Exchange notifies the
applicant of its decision.
(h) Exemptions for previous tax years.
(1) Except for the exemptions described
in § 155.605(c), (f), and (g), after
December 31 of a given calendar year,
the Exchange will not accept an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
application for an exemption that is
available retrospectively for months for
such calendar year, and must provide
information to individuals regarding
how to claim an exemption through the
tax filing process.
(2) The Exchange will only accept an
application for an exemption described
in § 155.605(g)(1) during one of the 3
calendar years after the month or
months during which the applicant
attests that the hardship occurred.
(i) Notification of eligibility
determination for exemptions. The
Exchange must provide timely written
notice to an applicant of any eligibility
determination made in accordance with
this subpart. In the case of a
determination that an applicant is
eligible for an exemption, this
notification must include the exemption
certificate number for the purposes of
tax administration.
(j) Retention of records for tax
compliance. (1) An Exchange must
notify an individual to retain the
records that demonstrate receipt of the
certificate of exemption and
qualification for the underlying
exemption.
(2) In the case of any factor of
eligibility that is verified through use of
the special circumstances exception
described in § 155.615(h), the records
that demonstrate qualification for the
underlying exemption are the
information submitted to the Exchange
regarding the circumstances that
warranted the use of the exception, as
well as records of the Exchange decision
to allow such exception.
§ 155.615 Verification process related to
eligibility for exemptions.
(a) General rule. Unless a request for
modification is granted under paragraph
(i) of this section, the Exchange must
verify or obtain information as provided
in this section in order to determine that
an applicant is eligible for an
exemption.
(b) Verification related to exemption
for religious conscience. For any
applicant who requests an exemption
based on religious conscience, the
Exchange must verify that he or she
meets the standards specified in
§ 155.605(c) by—
(1) Except as specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, accepting a form
that reflects that he or she is exempt
from Social Security and Medicare taxes
under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code;
(2) Except as specified in paragraphs
(b)(3) and (4) of this section, accepting
his or her attestation of membership in
a religious sect or division, and
verifying that the religious sect or
division to which the applicant attests
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
membership is recognized by the Social
Security Administration as an approved
religious sect or division under section
1402(g)(1) of the Code.
(3) If information provided by an
applicant regarding his or her
membership in a religious sect or
division is not reasonably compatible
with other information provided by the
individual or in the records of the
Exchange, the Exchange must follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (g) of
this section.
(4) If an applicant attests to
membership in a religious sect or
division that is not recognized by the
Social Security Administration as an
approved religious sect or division
under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, the
Exchange must provide the applicant
with information regarding how his or
her religious sect or division can pursue
recognition under section 1402(g)(1) of
the Code, and determine the applicant
ineligible for this exemption until such
time as the Exchange obtains
information indicating that the religious
sect or division has been approved.
(c) Verification related to exemption
for membership in a health care sharing
ministry. (1) For any applicant who
requests an exemption based on
membership in a health care sharing
ministry, the Exchange must verify that
the applicant meets the standards
specified in § 155.605(d) by, except as
provided in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and
(c)(1)(ii) of this section, accepting his or
her attestation; and verifying that the
health care sharing ministry to which
the applicant attests membership is
known to the Exchange as a valid health
care sharing ministry based on data
provided by HHS—
(i) If information provided by an
applicant regarding his or her
membership in a health care sharing
ministry is not reasonably compatible
with other information provided by the
individual or in the records of the
Exchange, the Exchange must follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (g) of
this section. The Exchange may not
consider an applicant’s prior or current
enrollment in health coverage as not
reasonably compatible with an
applicant’s attestation of membership in
a health care sharing ministry.
(ii) If an applicant attests to
membership in a health care sharing
ministry that is not known to the
Exchange as a health care sharing
ministry based on information provided
by HHS, the Exchange must provide the
applicant with information regarding
how an organization can pursue
recognition under § 155.615(c)(2), and
determine the applicant ineligible for
this exemption until such time as HHS
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
notifies the Exchange that the health
care sharing ministry’s meets the
standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
(2) To be considered a health care
sharing ministry for the purposes of this
subpart, an organization must submit
information to HHS that substantiates
the organization’s compliance with the
standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code. If at any
time HHS determines that an
organization previously considered a
health care sharing ministry for the
purposes of this subpart no longer meets
the standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code, HHS may
revoke its earlier decision regarding the
status of the health care sharing
ministry.
(d) Verification related to exemption
for incarceration. (1) For any applicant
who provides information attesting that
he or she was incarcerated for a given
month in accordance with the standards
specified in § 155.605(e), the Exchange
must verify his or her attestation
through the same process as described
in § 155.315(e).
(2) To the extent that the Exchange is
unable to verify an applicant’s
attestation that he or she was
incarcerated for a given month in
accordance with the standards specified
in § 155.605(e) through the process
described in § 155.315(e), the Exchange
must follow the procedures specified in
paragraph (g) of this section.
(e) Verification related to exemption
for members of Indian tribes. (1) For any
applicant who provides information
attesting that he or she is a member of
an Indian tribe, the Exchange must use
the process outlined in § 155.350(c) to
verify that the applicant is a member of
an Indian tribe.
(2) To the extent that the Exchange is
unable to verify an applicant’s status as
a member of an Indian tribe through the
process described in § 155.350(c), the
Exchange must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (g) of this
section.
(f) Verification related to exemption
for hardshi—(1) In general. For any
applicant who requests an exemption
based on hardship, except for the
hardship exemptions described in
§ 155.605(g)(3) and (5), the Exchange
must verify whether he or she has
experienced the hardship to which he or
she is attesting.
(2) Lack of affordable coverage based
on projected income. (i) For any
applicant who requests an exemption
based on the hardship described in
§ 155.605(g)(2), the Exchange must
verify the unavailability of affordable
coverage through the procedures used to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
determine eligibility for advance
payments of the premium tax credit, as
specified in subpart D of this part,
including the procedures described in
§ 155.315(c)(1), and the procedures used
to verify eligibility for qualifying
coverage in an eligible employersponsored plan, as specified in
§ 155.320(e), except as specified in
§ 155.615(f)(2)(ii).
(ii) The Exchange must accept an
application filer’s attestation for an
applicant regarding eligibility for
minimum essential coverage other than
through an eligible employer-sponsored
plan, instead of following the
procedures specified in § 155.320(b).
(3) Eligible for services through an
Indian health care provider. For any
applicant who requests an exemption
based on the hardship described in
§ 155.605(g)(6), the Exchange must
verify whether he or she meets the
standards specified in § 155.605(g)(6)
through the same process described in
§ 155.615(e).
(4) To the extent that the Exchange is
unable to verify any of the information
needed to determine an applicant’s
eligibility for an exemption based on
hardship, the Exchange must follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (g) of
this section.
(g) Inability to verify necessary
information. Except as otherwise
specified in this subpart, for an
applicant for whom the Exchange
cannot verify information required to
determine eligibility for an exemption,
including but not limited to when
electronic data is required in accordance
with this subpart but data for
individuals relevant to the eligibility
determination for an exemption are not
included in such data sources or when
electronic data is required but it is not
reasonably expected that data sources
will be available within the time period
as specified in § 155.315(f), the
Exchange—
(1) Must make a reasonable effort to
identify and address the causes of such
inconsistency, including typographical
or other clerical errors, by contacting the
application filer to confirm the accuracy
of the information submitted by the
application filer;
(2) If unable to resolve the
inconsistency through the process
described in paragraph (g)(1) of this
section, must—
(i) Provide notice to the applicant
regarding the inconsistency; and
(ii) Provide the applicant with a
period of 90 days from the date on
which the notice described in paragraph
(g)(2)(i) of this section is sent to the
applicant to either present satisfactory
documentary evidence via the channels
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
39527
available for the submission of an
application, as described in
§ 155.610(d), except for by telephone, or
otherwise to resolve the inconsistency.
(3) May extend the period described
in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section for
an applicant if the applicant
demonstrates that a good faith effort has
been made to obtain the required
documentation during the period.
(4) During the period described in
paragraph (g)(1) and (g)(2)(ii) of this
section, must not grant a certificate of
exemption based on the information
subject to this paragraph.
(5) If, after the period described in
paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section, the
Exchange remains unable to verify the
attestation, the Exchange must
determine the applicant’s eligibility for
an exemption based on any information
available from the data sources used in
accordance with this subpart, if
applicable, unless such applicant
qualifies for the exception provided
under paragraph (h) of this section, and
notify the applicant of such
determination in accordance with the
notice requirements specified in
§ 155.610(i), including notice that the
Exchange is unable to verify the
attestation.
(h) Exception for special
circumstances. For an applicant who
does not have documentation with
which to resolve the inconsistency
through the process described in
paragraph (g)(2) of this section because
such documentation does not exist or is
not reasonably available and for whom
the Exchange is unable to otherwise
resolve the inconsistency, the Exchange
must provide an exception, on a caseby-case basis, to accept an applicant’s
attestation as to the information which
cannot otherwise be verified along with
an explanation of circumstances as to
why the applicant does not have
documentation.
(i) Flexibility in information collection
and verification. HHS may approve an
Exchange Blueprint in accordance with
§ 155.105(d) or a significant change to
the Exchange Blueprint in accordance
with § 155.105(e) to modify the methods
to be used for collection of information
and verification as set forth in this
subpart, as well as the specific
information required to be collected,
provided that HHS finds that such
modification would reduce the
administrative costs and burdens on
individuals while maintaining accuracy
and minimizing delay, and that
applicable requirements under
§§ 155.260, 155.270, and paragraph (j) of
this section, and section 6103 of the
Code with respect to the confidentiality,
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
39528
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
disclosure, maintenance, or use of such
information will be met.
(j) Applicant information. The
Exchange may not require an applicant
to provide information beyond the
minimum necessary to support the
eligibility process for exemptions as
described in this subpart.
(k) Validation of Social Security
number. (1) For any individual who
provides his or her Social Security
number to the Exchange, the Exchange
must transmit the Social Security
number and other identifying
information to HHS, which will submit
it to the Social Security Administration.
(2) To the extent that the Exchange is
unable to validate an individual’s Social
Security number through the Social
Security Administration, or the Social
Security Administration indicates that
the individual is deceased, the
Exchange must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (g) of this
section, except that the Exchange must
provide the individual with a period of
90 days from the date on which the
notice described in paragraph (g)(2)(i) of
this section is received for the applicant
to provide satisfactory documentary
evidence or resolve the inconsistency
with the Social Security Administration.
The date on which the notice is received
means 5 days after the date on the
notice, unless the individual
demonstrates that he or she did not
receive the notice within the 5 day
period.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
§ 155.620 Eligibility redeterminations for
exemptions during a calendar year.
(a) General requirement. The
Exchange must redetermine the
eligibility of an individual with an
exemption granted by the Exchange if it
receives and verifies new information
reported by such an individual, except
for the exemption described in
§ 155.605(g)(2).
(b) Requirement for individuals to
report changes. (1) Except as specified
in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the
Exchange must require an individual
who has a certificate of exemption from
the Exchange to report any change with
respect to the eligibility standards for
the exemption as specified in § 155.605,
except for the exemption described in
§ 155.605(g)(2), within 30 days of such
change.
(2) The Exchange must allow an
individual with a certificate of
exemption to report changes via the
channels available for the submission of
an application, as described in
§ 155.610(d).
(c) Verification of reported changes.
The Exchange must—
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
(1) Verify any information reported by
an individual with a certificate of
exemption in accordance with the
processes specified in § 155.615 prior to
using such information in an eligibility
redetermination.
(2) Notify an individual in accordance
with § 155.610(i) after redetermining his
or her eligibility based on a reported
change.
(3) Provide periodic electronic
notifications regarding the requirements
for reporting changes and an
individual’s opportunity to report any
changes, to an individual who has a
certificate of exemption for which
changes must be reported in accordance
with § 155.620(b) and who has elected
to receive electronic notifications,
unless he or she has declined to receive
such notifications.
(d) Effective date of changes. The
Exchange must implement a change
resulting from a redetermination under
this section for the month or months
after the month in which the
redetermination occurs, such that a
certificate that was provided for the
month in which the redetermination
occurs, and for prior months remains
effective.
§ 155.625 Options for conducting eligibility
determinations for exemptions.
(a) Options for conducting eligibility
determinations. The Exchange may
satisfy the requirements of this
subpart—
(1) Directly or through contracting
arrangements in accordance with
§ 155.110(a); or (2) Through the
approach described in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(b) Use of HHS service.
Notwithstanding the requirements of
this subpart—
(1) For an application submitted
before October 15, 2014, the Exchange
may adopt an exemption eligibility
determination made by HHS, provided
that—
(i) The Exchange adheres to the
eligibility determination made by HHS;
(ii) The Exchange furnishes to HHS
any information available through the
Exchange that is necessary for an
applicant to utilize the process
administered by HHS; and
(iii) The Exchange call center and
Internet Web site specified in
§ 155.205(a) and (b), respectively,
provide information to consumers
regarding the exemption eligibility
process.
(2) For an application submitted on or
after October 15, 2014, the Exchange
may adopt an exemption eligibility
determination made by HHS, provided
that—
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(i) The Exchange accepts the
application, as specified in § 155.610(c),
and issues the eligibility notice, as
specified in § 155.610(i);
(ii) Verifications and other activities
required in connection with eligibility
determinations for exemptions are
performed by the Exchange in
accordance with the standards
identified in this subpart or by HHS in
accordance with the agreement
described in paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this
section;
(iii) The Exchange transmits to HHS
promptly and without undue delay and
via secure electronic interface, all
information provided as a part of the
application or update that initiated the
eligibility determination, and any
information obtained or verified by the
Exchange;
(iv) The Exchange adheres to the
eligibility determination made by HHS;
and
(v) The Exchange and HHS enter into
an agreement specifying their respective
responsibilities in connection with
eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
§ 155.630
Reporting.
Requirement to provide information
related to tax administration. If the
Exchange grants an individual a
certificate of exemption in accordance
with § 155.610(i), the Exchange must
transmit to the IRS at such time and in
such manner as the IRS may specify—
(a) The individual’s name, Social
Security number, and exemption
certificate number;
(b) Any other information required in
guidance published by the Secretary of
the Treasury in accordance with 26 CFR
601.601(d)(2).
§ 155.635
Right to appeal.
(a) For an application submitted
before October 15, 2014, the Exchange
must include the notice of the right to
appeal and instructions regarding how
to file an appeal in any notification
issued in accordance with § 155.610(i).
(b) For an application submitted on or
after October 15, 2014, the Exchange
must include the notice of the right to
appeal and instructions regarding how
to file an appeal in any notification
issued in accordance with § 155.610(i)
and § 155.625(b)(2)(i).
PART 156—HEALTH INSURANCE
ISSUER STANDARDS UNDER THE
AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, INCLUDING
STANDARDS RELATED TO
EXCHANGES
5. The authority citation for part 156
is revised to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: Title I of the Affordable Care
Act, Sections 1301–1304, 1311–1312, 1321,
1322, 1324, 1334, 1341–1343, and 1401–
1402, 1501, Pub. L. 111–148, 124 Stat. 119
(42 U.S.C. 18042).
6. Add subpart G to part 156 to read
as follows:
■
Subpart G—Minimum Essential Coverage
Sec.
156.600 The definition of minimum
essential coverage.
156.602 Other coverage that qualifies as
minimum essential coverage.
156.604 Requirements for recognition as
minimum essential coverage for types of
coverage not otherwise designated
minimum essential coverage in the
statute or this subpart.
156.606 HHS audit authority.
Subpart G—Minimum Essential
Coverage
§ 156.600 The definition of minimum
essential coverage.
The term minimum essential coverage
has the same meaning as provided in
section 5000A(f) of the Code and its
implementing regulations for purposes
of this subpart.
§ 156.602 Other coverage that qualifies as
minimum essential coverage.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES3
The following types of coverage are
designated by the Secretary as minimum
essential coverage for purposes of
section 5000A(f)(1)(E) of the Code:
(a) Self-funded student health
coverage. Coverage offered to students
by an institution of higher education (as
defined in the Higher Education Act of
1965), where the institution assumes the
risk for payment of claims, are
designated as minimum essential
coverage for plan or policy years
beginning on or before December 31,
2014. For coverage beginning after
December 31, 2014, sponsors of selffunded student health coverage may
apply to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage pursuant to the
process provided under 45 CFR 156.604.
(b) Refugee Medical Assistance
supported by the Administration for
Children and Families. Coverage under
Refugee Medical Assistance, authorized
under section 412(e)(7)(A) of The
Immigration and Nationality Act,
provides up to eight months of coverage
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:58 Jun 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
to certain noncitizens who are
considered Refugees, as defined in
section 101(a)(42) of the Act.
(c) Medicare advantage plans.
Coverage under the Medicare program
pursuant to Part C of title XVIII of the
Social Security Act, which provides
Medicare Parts A and B benefits through
a private insurer.
(d) State high risk pool coverage. State
high risk pools are designated as
minimum essential coverage for plan or
policy years beginning on or before
December 31, 2014. For coverage
beginning after December 31, 2014,
sponsors of high risk pool coverage may
apply to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage pursuant to the
process provided under § 156.604.
(e) Other coverage. Other coverage
that qualifies pursuant to § 156.604.
§ 156.604 Requirements for recognition as
minimum essential coverage for types of
coverage not otherwise designated
minimum essential coverage in the statute
or this subpart.
(a) The Secretary may recognize
‘‘other coverage’’ as minimum essential
coverage provided HHS determines that
the coverage meets the following
substantive and procedural
requirements:
(1) Coverage requirements. A plan
must meet substantially all the
requirements of title I of the Affordable
Care Act pertaining to nongrandfathered, individual health
insurance coverage.
(2) Procedural requirements.
Procedural requirements for recognition
as minimum essential coverage. To be
considered for recognition as minimum
essential coverage, the sponsor of the
coverage, or government agency, must
submit the following information to
HHS:
(i) Identity of the plan sponsor and
appropriate contact persons;
(ii) Basic information about the plan,
including:
(A) Name of the organization
sponsoring the plan;
(B) Name and title of the individual
who is authorized to make, and makes,
this certification on behalf of the
organization;
(C) Address of the individual named
above;
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
39529
(D) Phone number of the individual
named above;
(E) Number of enrollees;
(F) Eligibility criteria;
(G) Cost sharing requirements,
including deductible and out-of-pocket
maximum limit;
(H) Essential health benefits covered;
and
(I) A certification by the appropriate
individual, named pursuant to
paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(b), that the
organization substantially complies
with the requirements of title I of the
Affordable Care Act that apply to nongrandfathered plans in the individual
market and any plan documentation or
other information that demonstrate that
the coverage substantially comply with
these requirements.
(b) CMS will publish a list of types of
coverage that the Secretary has
recognized as minimum essential
coverage pursuant to this provision.
(c) If at any time the Secretary
determines that a type of coverage
previously recognized as minimum
essential coverage no longer meets the
coverage requirements of paragraph
(a)(1) of this section, the Secretary may
revoke the recognition of such coverage.
(d) Notice. Once recognized as
minimum essential coverage, a plan
must provide notice to all enrollees of
its minimum essential coverage status
and must comply with the information
reporting requirements of section 6055
of the Code and implementing
regulations.
§ 156.606
HHS audit authority.
The Secretary may audit a plan or
program recognized as minimum
essential coverage under § 156.604 at
any time to ensure compliance with the
requirements of § 156.604(a).
Dated: June 7, 2013.
Marilyn Tavenner,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services
Approved: June 11, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–15530 Filed 6–26–13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM
01JYR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 126 (Monday, July 1, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39493-39529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15530]
[[Page 39493]]
Vol. 78
Monday,
No. 126
July 1, 2013
Part IV
Department of Health and Human Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
45 CFR Parts 155 and 156
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Exchange Functions:
Eligibility for Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum Essential Coverage
Provisions; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 78 , No. 126 / Monday, July 1, 2013 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 39494]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Parts 155 and 156
[CMS-9958-F]
RIN 0938-AR68
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Exchange Functions:
Eligibility for Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum Essential Coverage
Provisions
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule implements certain functions of the Affordable
Insurance Exchanges (``Exchanges''). These specific statutory functions
include determining eligibility for and granting certificates of
exemption from the individual shared responsibility payment described
in section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code. Additionally, this final
rule implements the responsibilities of the Secretary of Health and
Human Services, in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, to
designate other health benefits coverage as minimum essential coverage
by providing that certain coverage be designated as minimum essential
coverage. It also outlines substantive and procedural requirements that
other types of individual coverage must fulfill in order to be
certified as minimum essential coverage.
DATES: Effective Date: These regulations are effective on August 26,
2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zachary L. Baron, (301) 492-4478, for
provisions related to exemptions from the individual shared
responsibility payment. Cam Moultrie Clemmons, (410) 786-1565, for
provisions related to minimum essential coverage.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
To ensure effective and efficient implementation of the insurance
market reforms, the Affordable Care Act requires a nonexempt individual
to maintain minimum essential coverage or make a shared responsibility
payment. The Affordable Care Act specifies the categories of
individuals who are eligible to receive exemptions from the individual
shared responsibility payment under section 5000A of the Internal
Revenue Code (the Code), which provides nonexempt individuals with a
choice: maintain minimum essential coverage for themselves and any
nonexempt family members or include an additional payment with their
federal income tax return. Some individuals are exempt from the shared
responsibility payment, including members of recognized religious sects
whose tenets conflict with acceptance of the benefits of private or
public insurance and those who do not have an affordable health
insurance coverage option available. Section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the
Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18031(d)(4)(H)) directs the new health
insurance marketplaces, called Affordable Insurance Exchanges
(Exchanges), to issue certifications of exemption from the individual
shared responsibility payment to eligible individuals. Section 1411 of
the Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18081) generally provides procedures
for determining an individual's eligibility for various benefits
relating to health coverage, including exemptions from the application
of section 5000A of the Code.
This final rule sets forth standards and processes under which the
Exchange will conduct eligibility determinations for, and grant
certificates of exemption from, the individual shared responsibility
payment. Furthermore, it supports and complements rulemaking conducted
by the Secretary of the Treasury with respect to section 5000A of the
Code, as added by section 1501(b) of the Affordable Care Act. The
intent of this rule is to implement the relevant provisions while
continuing to afford states substantial discretion in the design and
operation of an Exchange, with greater standardization provided where
directed by the statute or where there are compelling practical,
efficiency, or consumer protection reasons.
Under section 5000A(f)(1)(E) of the Code, the Secretary of the
Department of Health and Human Services (the Secretary), in
coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, may designate other
health benefits coverage as minimum essential coverage. This final rule
provides standards for determining whether certain other types of
health insurance coverage constitute minimum essential coverage and
procedures for plan sponsors to follow for a plan to be identified as
minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the Code. This rule
also designates certain types of existing health coverage as minimum
essential coverage. Other types of coverage, not statutorily specified
and not designated as minimum essential coverage in this regulation,
may be recognized as minimum essential coverage if certain substantive
and procedural requirements are met as set forth in this rule. These
additional categories of minimum essential coverage, both those
designated per se and those that may apply for recognition are neither
group health insurance coverage nor individual health insurance.
Consumers with types of coverage that are recognized as minimum
essential coverage in accordance with this rule would be determined to
have minimum essential coverage if the coverage is certified to be
substantially compliant with the requirements of title I of the
Affordable Care Act that apply to non-grandfathered plans in the
individual market.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
I. Background
A. Legislative Overview
B. Stakeholder Consultation and Input
C. Alignment With Related Rules and Published Information
II. Provisions of the Regulation and Analysis of and Responses to
Public Comments
A. Part 155--Exchange Establishment Standards and Other Related
Standards Under the Affordable Care Act
1. Subpart A--General Provisions
a. Definitions (Sec. 155.20)
2. Subpart C--General Functions of an Exchange
a. Functions of an Exchange (Sec. 155.200)
3. Subpart G--Exchange Functions in the Individual Market:
Eligibility Determinations for Exemptions
a. Definitions and General Requirements (Sec. 155.600)
b. Eligibility Standards for Exemptions (Sec. 155.605)
c. Eligibility Process for Exemptions (Sec. 155.610)
d. Verification Process Related to Eligibility for Exemptions
(Sec. 155.615)
e. Eligibility Redeterminations for Exemptions During a Calendar
Year (Sec. 155.620)
f. Options for Conducting Eligibility Determinations for
Exemptions (Sec. 155.625)
g. Reporting (Sec. 155.630)
h. Right To Appeal (Sec. 155.635)
B. Part 156--Health Insurance Issuer Standards Under the
Affordable Care Act, Including Standards Related to Exchanges
a. Definition of Minimum Essential Coverage (Sec. 156.600)
b. Other Types of Coverage That Qualify as Minimum Essential
Coverage (Sec. 156.602)
c. Requirements for Recognition as Minimum Essential Coverage
for Coverage Not Otherwise Designated Minimum Essential Coverage in
the Statute or This Regulation (Sec. 156.604)
d. HHS Audit Authority (Sec. 156.606)
III. Provisions of the Final Regulation
IV. Collection of Information Requirements
V. Summary of Regulatory Impact Statement
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
VII. Unfunded Mandates
VIII. Federalism
[[Page 39495]]
IX. Congressional Review Act
Regulation Text
Abbreviations
Affordable Care Act--the Affordable Care Act of 2010 (which is the
collective term for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
(Pub. L. 111-148) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation
Act (Pub. L. 111-152))
BHP Basic Health Program
CHIP Children's Health Insurance Program
CMS Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
FPL Federal Poverty Level
HHS Department of Health and Human Services
IRS Internal Revenue Service
NAIC National Association of Insurance Commissioners
QHP Qualified Health Plan
SSA Social Security Administration
SSN Social Security Number
Code Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as Amended
I. Background
A. Legislative Overview
Section 1501(b) of the Affordable Care Act added section 5000A of
the Internal Revenue Code (the Code) to a new chapter 48 of subtitle D
(Miscellaneous Excise Taxes) of the Code effective for months beginning
after December 31, 2013. Section 5000A of the Code, which was
subsequently amended by the TRICARE Affirmation Act of 2010, Public Law
111-159 (124 Stat. 1123) and Public Law 111-173 (124 Stat. 1215),
requires that nonexempt individuals either maintain minimum essential
coverage or make a shared responsibility payment. It also describes
categories of individuals who may qualify for an exemption from the
individual shared responsibility payment, and provides the definition
of minimum essential coverage.
Section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the Affordable Care Act specifies that the
Exchange will, subject to section 1411 of the Affordable Care Act,
grant certifications of exemption from the individual shared
responsibility payment specified in section 5000A of the Code. Section
1311(d)(4)(I)(i) of the Affordable Care Act specifies that the Exchange
will transfer to the Secretary of the Treasury a list of the
individuals to whom the Exchange provided such a certification. Section
1411(a)(4) of the Affordable Care Act provides that the Secretary of
Health and Human Services (the Secretary) will establish a program for
determining whether a certification of exemption from the individual
shared responsibility requirement and penalty will be issued by an
Exchange under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the Affordable Care Act. We
interpret this provision as authorizing the Secretary to determine
``whether,'' with respect to the nine exemptions provided for under
section 5000A of the Code, Exchanges would perform the role of issuing
certifications of exemption under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the
Affordable Care Act, whether eligibility for the exemption would be
claimed solely through tax filing, or whether both processes would be
available. Under this interpretation, the responsibility under section
1311(d)(4)(H) of the Affordable Care Act to issue certifications of
exemption is ``subject to'' these determinations by the Secretary under
section 1411(a)(4) of the Affordable Care Act, and Exchanges are thus
only required to issue certifications of exemption with respect to
exemptions not exclusively assigned to the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS).
Section 1321 of the Affordable Care Act discusses state flexibility
in the operation and enforcement of Exchanges and related requirements.
Section 1321(a) of the Affordable Care Act provides broad authority for
the Secretary to establish standards and regulations to implement the
statutory requirements related to Exchanges and other components of
title I of the Affordable Care Act as amended by the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Section 1311(k) of the Affordable
Care Act specifies that Exchanges may not establish rules that conflict
with or prevent the application of regulations promulgated by the
Secretary under Subtitle D of title I of the Affordable Care Act.
In accordance with our interpretation of these sections of the
Affordable Care Act, and the authority provided by, inter alia, section
1321(a) of the Affordable Care Act, we specify that under the program
established under section 1411(a)(4) of the Affordable Care Act, the
Exchange will determine eligibility for and grant certificates of
exemption as described below. We also note that consistent with prior
guidance, in the State Exchange Implementation Questions and Answers
released by HHS on November 29, 2011,\1\ and the Frequently Asked
Questions on Exchanges, Market Reforms, and Medicaid released by HHS on
December 10, 2012,\2\ a state-based Exchange can be approved to operate
by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) if it uses a
federally-managed service to make eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ State Exchange Implementation Questions and Answers,
published November 29, 2011: https://cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/Files2/11282011/exchange_q_and_a.pdf.pdf.
\2\ Frequently Asked Questions on Exchanges, Market Reforms, and
Medicaid, published December 10, 2012: https://cciio.cms.gov/resources/files/exchanges-faqs-12-10-2012.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 27, 2012, HHS published the final rule entitled ``Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act; Establishment of Exchanges and
Qualified Health Plans; Exchange Standards for Employers'' (77 FR
18309). The provisions of the final rule, herein referred to as the
Exchange final rule, encompass the key functions of Exchanges related
to eligibility, enrollment, and plan participation and management. In
the Exchange final rule, 45 CFR 155.200(b) provided that a minimum
function of an Exchange is to grant certificates of exemption
consistent with sections 1311(d)(4)(H) and 1411 of the Affordable Care
Act. This final rule cross-references several provisions in the
Exchange final rule, notably the limited situations where eligibility
and verification processes used in determining eligibility for
enrollment in a qualified health plan (QHP) through the Exchange and
for insurance affordability programs can also be used by Exchanges for
the purpose of determining whether an individual is eligible for an
exemption from the individual shared responsibility payment.
Section 5000A(f) of the Code designates certain types of coverage
as minimum essential coverage. The term ``minimum essential coverage''
includes all of the following under the statute: Government sponsored
programs (the Medicare program under part A of title XVIII of the
Social Security Act (the Act); the Medicaid program under title XIX of
the Act; the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) program under
title XXI of the Act; medical coverage under chapter 55 of title 10,
United States Code, including the TRICARE program; a health care
program under chapter 17 or 18 of title 38, United States Code, as
determined by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in coordination with
the Secretaries of the Department of Health and Human Services and
Treasury; a health plan under section 2504(e) of title 22, United
States Code (relating to Peace Corps volunteers); or the
Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program of the Department of
Defense (established under section 349 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995); coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan; coverage under a health plan offered in the
individual market within a State; and coverage under a grandfathered
health plan. In addition, section 5000A(f)(1)(E) of the Code directs
the Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of
[[Page 39496]]
Treasury, to designate other health benefits coverage, such as a state
health benefits risk pool, as minimum essential coverage. This final
rule designates certain additional types of coverage qualify as minimum
essential coverage and also provides a process by which other types of
coverage could be recognized as minimum essential coverage.
B. Stakeholder Consultation and Input
On August 3, 2010, HHS published a request for comment (the RFC)
inviting the public to provide input regarding the rules that will
govern the Exchanges. In particular, HHS asked states, tribal
representatives, consumer advocates, employers, insurers, and other
interested stakeholders to comment on the standards Exchanges should
meet. The comment period closed on October 4, 2010.
The public response to the RFC yielded comment submissions from
consumer advocacy organizations, medical and health care professional
trade associations and societies, medical and health care professional
entities, health insurers, insurance trade associations, members of the
general public, and employer organizations. The majority of the
comments were related to the general functions and standards for
Exchanges, qualified health plans (QHPs), eligibility and enrollment,
and coordination with Medicaid. While this final rule does not directly
respond to comments from the RFC, the comments received are described,
where applicable, in discussing specific regulatory proposals. These
comments are not separately identified, but instead are incorporated
into each substantive section of this final rule as appropriate.
In addition to the RFC, HHS received comments on the proposed rule
titled ``Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Exchange
Functions: Eligibility for Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum Essential
Coverage Provisions'' (78 FR 7348) that are, similarly not separately
identified, but incorporated into each substantive section of this
final rule. HHS has also consulted with stakeholders through regular
meetings with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC), regular contact with states through the Exchange grant process,
and meetings with tribal representatives, health insurance issuers,
trade groups, consumer advocates, employers, and other interested
parties. HHS initiated and hosted a tribal consultation on February 21,
2013, where we allowed federally-recognized tribal leaders and
representatives from tribal health organizations the opportunity to
discuss and provide feedback regarding the provisions within the
proposed rule. Furthermore, we also received feedback from health care
sharing ministries about the process for how individual members can
obtain certificates of exemption based on their membership in a health
care sharing ministry, and an expression of interest in a process for
allowing health care sharing ministries to obtain recognition that they
meet the standards under section 5000A(d)(2)(B) of the Code. We also
received information from various stakeholder groups regarding types of
``other coverage'' as described in section 5000A(f)(1)(E) of the Code.
C. Alignment With Related Rules and Published Information
The proposed rule, titled ``Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; Exchange Functions: Eligibility for Exemptions; Miscellaneous
Minimum Essential Coverage Provisions'' (78 FR 7348), was published in
the Federal Register on February 1, 2013 in coordination with the
Department of Treasury's proposed rule, ``Shared Responsibility Payment
for Not Maintaining Minimum Essential Coverage'' (78 FR 7314)
(hereinafter referred to as ``the Treasury proposed rule''). The
Department of the Treasury's proposed rule will be finalized at a later
date. Accordingly, in this final rule, we have removed cross-references
to the Treasury proposed rule and replaced them with cross-references
to the applicable language in the Affordable Care Act. Upon publication
of the Treasury final rule, we intend to replace the statutory
references with the appropriate regulatory references.
II. Provisions of the Regulation and Analysis of and Responses to
Public Comments
On February 1, 2013, we published a proposed rule, titled ``Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act; Exchange Functions: Eligibility for
Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum Essential Coverage Provisions'' (78
FR 7348), in which we proposed to add subpart G to 45 CFR part 155,
which includes standards for Exchanges related to conducting
eligibility determinations for and granting certificates of exemption
from the individual shared responsibility payment. We also proposed to
amend Sec. 155.200(a) to add a reference to indicate that, consistent
with existing language in Sec. 155.200(b), granting certificates of
exemption is a minimum function of the Exchange. Furthermore, we
proposed to add subpart G to 45 CFR part 156, which set forth standards
under which the Secretary would designate certain types of existing
coverage, not specified under section 5000A, as minimum essential
coverage. Additionally, under the proposed regulation, other types of
coverage that were neither statutorily nor regulatory designated as
minimum essential coverage, may be recognized as minimum essential
coverage if certain substantive and procedural requirements are met.
These types of coverage, both those designated per se and those
recognized by application, are neither group health insurance coverage
nor individual health insurance. Consumers with coverage recognized as
minimum essential coverage in accordance with this regulation would be
determined to have minimum essential coverage for purposes of the
individual shared responsibility provision.
We received approximately 220 public comments from state agencies,
advocacy groups, health care providers, employers, health insurers,
health care associations, and others. The comments ranged from general
support or opposition to the proposed provisions to very specific
questions or comments regarding the proposed rules.
Some comments were outside the scope of the proposed rule, and
therefore are not addressed in this final rule. In some instances,
commenters raised policy or operational issues, such as those related
to certified application counselors, authorized representatives, and
eligibility appeals, that will be addressed through forthcoming
regulatory and subregulatory guidance to be provided subsequent to this
final rule; therefore, some, but not all comments are addressed in the
preamble to this final rule.
Brief summaries of each proposed provision, a summary of the public
comments we received (with the exception of specific comments on the
paperwork burden or the regulatory impact analysis), and our responses
to the comments are below. Comments related to the paperwork burden are
addressed in the ``Collection of Information Requirements'' and section
in this final rule. We did not receive comments related to the impact
analysis.
A. Part 155--Exchange Establishment Standards and Other Related
Standards Under the Affordable Care Act
1. Subpart A--General Provisions
a. Definitions (Sec. 155.20)
We proposed to make a technical correction to the definitions of
``applicant'' and ``application filer'' to note that they do not apply
to an
[[Page 39497]]
applicant or application filer seeking an exemption pursuant to
proposed subpart G. We proposed separate definitions specific to
exemptions for these terms in Sec. 155.600.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concerns about HHS' pre-
existing definition of ``application filer'' in Sec. 155.20 based on
its cross-reference to the definition of ``family'' within the Code and
the inclusion of this definition as proposed in Sec. 155.600(a).
Commenters believed the inclusion of the definition of ``family''
within the Code would limit the flexibility of an applicant to include
people who would have relationships that may otherwise be included on
an exemption application. Commenters believed that these cross-
references were inconsistent with other provisions, as they noted that
subject to state rules, QHP issuers can allow individuals in multiple
tax households to enroll in a QHP together, and that HHS has proposed
to define ``dependent'' in 78 FR 4718 for purposes of eligibility for
special enrollment periods based on whether a QHP issuer will allow
individuals to enroll in a QHP together. As such, they urged HHS to
remove the references to the definition of family within the Code and
its implementing regulation.
Response: The commenters correctly describe different situations in
which recognition of relationships is determined by who can enroll in a
QHP together. In proposing to amend the definition of ``application
filer'' in Sec. 155.20 to exclude those individuals seeking
eligibility for an exemption pursuant to subpart G, we otherwise
maintained the definition from the Exchange final rule regarding the
coverage application process at 77 FR 18445 with a few minor technical
corrections. Further, we note that comments regarding eligibility for
enrollment in a QHP and insurance affordability programs are beyond the
scope of this regulation. Since the relevant family unit for the
individual shared responsibility provision is the tax filing unit, our
proposed language defining ``application filer'' at Sec. 155.600(a)
specific to subpart G cross-references section 5000A(a) of the Code
regarding the individual shared responsibility provision. Because the
individual shared responsibility provision will be administered by the
Internal Revenue Service on a tax-return-by-tax-return basis, we
believe it is appropriate to provide that only members of the same tax
filing unit may file an exemption application together.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.20 of the
proposed rule with a few technical corrections. We clarify that the
term ``applicant'' in this provision excludes those individuals seeking
eligibility for an exemption from the individual shared responsibility
payment pursuant to subpart G. We also clarify that our previous
inclusion of an authorized representative in the definition refers to
the authorized representative of an applicant. We also cite to the
applicable Treasury regulation instead of section 36B of the Code.
2. Subpart C--General Functions of an Exchange
a. Functions of an Exchange (Sec. 155.200)
In paragraph (a), we proposed to add that the Exchange would also
perform the minimum functions described in subpart G of this part
related to eligibility determinations for exemptions.
Comment: Commenters generally supported our proposal that the
Exchange would also perform the minimum functions described in subpart
G of this part related to eligibility determinations for exemptions.
Some commenters raised concerns that the HHS proposed rule and the
Treasury proposed rule discussed different issues, and wanted to ensure
that both agencies were working in close coordination. Other commenters
expressed opposition to Exchanges determining eligibility for
exemptions based on overarching philosophical complaints regarding this
proposed rule and this provision of the Affordable Care Act. One
commenter wanted HHS to reduce the number of exemptions available to
individuals. Lastly, another commenter believed that HHS was providing
too much latitude to states in determining the basic framework for
Exchanges, and rather should set more strict guidelines to prevent
confusion for Exchanges and consumers.
Response: We continue to coordinate closely with the Department of
Treasury and a range of stakeholders to ensure that we provide
sufficient guidance to Exchanges, while also ensuring the appropriate
level of operational flexibility to allow for effective implementation.
We note that the categories of exemptions proposed were based on the
definitions provided within the Affordable Care Act, which added
section 5000A of the Code. As we discuss further below, the Secretary
of HHS has exercised careful discretion in specifying criteria for the
hardship exemption in accordance with section 5000A(e)(5) of the Code,
to ensure that a hardship exemption is only available in limited
circumstances in which an individual has suffered a hardship with
respect to the capability to obtain coverage under a QHP.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provision proposed in Sec. 155.200 of the
proposed rule without modification.
3. Subpart G--Exchange Functions in the Individual Market: Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions
a. Definitions and General Requirements (Sec. 155.600)
In paragraph (a) of Sec. 155.600, we proposed definitions and
sought comments for terms that apply throughout subpart G. First, we
proposed to define ``applicant'' as an individual who is seeking an
exemption from the individual shared responsibility payment for him or
herself through an application submitted to the Exchange. We proposed
to define ``application filer'' as an applicant; an individual who is
liable for the individual shared responsibility payment (in accordance
with 26 CFR 1.5000A-1(c) of the Treasury proposed rule) for an
applicant; an authorized representative; or if the applicant is a minor
or incapacitated, someone acting responsibly for an applicant. We noted
that we intended to modify the proposed language in Sec. 155.227 (78
FR 4711) and Sec. 155.225 (78 FR 4710) to clarify that authorized
representatives and certified application counselors can assist
individuals seeking exemptions, and sought comments about how
authorized representatives and certified application counselors could
best support individuals seeking certificates of exemption from the
Exchange.
We proposed to define ``exemption'' as an exemption from the
individual shared responsibility payment, noting that there is no
meaningful distinction between individuals exempt from the shared
responsibility payment and individuals who are not ``applicable
individuals'' for purposes of the requirement to maintain minimum
essential coverage in section 5000A of the Code.
We proposed to define ``health care sharing ministry'' in the same
manner as provided in 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(b) of the Treasury proposed
rule.
We proposed to define ``required contribution'' in the same manner
as provided in 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(e) of the Treasury proposed rule.
We proposed to define ``Indian tribe'' in the same manner as in 26
CFR
[[Page 39498]]
1.5000A-3(g) of the Treasury proposed rule, which in turn references
the definition in section 45A(c)(6) of the Code.
In paragraph (b), we proposed that for purposes of this subpart,
any attestation that an applicant is to provide under this subpart may
also be provided by an application filer on behalf of the applicant.
In paragraph (c) of Sec. 155.600, we proposed that for the
purposes of this subpart, the Exchange must consider information
through electronic data sources, other information provided by the
applicant, or other information as available in the records of the
Exchange to be reasonably compatible with an applicant's attestation if
the difference or discrepancy does not impact the eligibility for the
relevant exemption or exemptions for which the applicant requested.
We also proposed to add paragraphs (d) and (e) in order to specify
that the accessibility and notice requirements in Sec. 155.205(c) and
Sec. 155.230, respectively, apply to exemptions as well, given that
the definition of applicant in this subpart is otherwise specific to
exemptions.
Comment: One commenter raised concerns about health care sharing
ministries. The commenter noted that health care sharing ministries are
not subject to state insurance laws, and as such, the statutory
exemption for members of health care sharing ministries may create
circumstances in which an individual who is a member of a health care
sharing ministry does not benefit from the Affordable Care Act's
broader consumer protections. The commenter believed that this might
motivate organizations to seek to establish standing as a health care
sharing ministry in order to evade consumer protections and market
reforms enacted by the Affordable Care Act. The commenter advised HHS
and IRS to carefully monitor applications from entities seeking
recognition as a health care sharing ministry for the purpose of
exemptions.
Response: The Affordable Care Act defines health care sharing
ministry for purposes of an exemption in section 5000A(d)(2)(B) of the
Code. We appreciate the concerns raised regarding organizations that
may improperly seek standing as a health care sharing ministry. As we
discuss further below, we believe that the process discussed in Sec.
155.615(c) will ensure that HHS only provides exemptions based on
membership in a health care sharing ministry for individuals who are
members of health care sharing ministries that meet the standards in
the statute, which specify that a health care sharing ministry or its
predecessor must have been in existence at all times since December 31,
1999.
Comment: Commenters generally supported allowing an application
filer to attest for an applicant on the exemptions application.
However, one commenter believed that ``attestation'' was not defined
clearly enough in Sec. 155.600(b), and as such recommended that HHS
revise this provision to more clearly specific the acceptable form and
manner of an attestation.
Response: The proposed language regarding attestations in Sec.
155.600(b) mirrors the language in 45 CFR 155.300(c), which is used in
the coverage process. As we believe this definition provides sufficient
flexibility and clarity for Exchanges, we do not deviate from the
language used in the coverage process to describe an attestation.
Comment: Several commenters requested that HHS ensure that the
application process, including eligibility notices, be accessible to
individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) as well as those
individuals with disabilities. Commenters also urged HHS to include
clearer guidelines regarding the exemption eligibility process in order
to ensure that the processes do not discriminate against individuals,
particularly LEP individuals. Commenters requested translation of the
requisite materials in non-English languages, and suggested that HHS
refer to LEP guidance adopted by the HHS Office of Civil Rights.
Response: We appreciate commenters' concerns regarding ensuring
that the application process and eligibility notices are accessible to
individuals with LEP as well as those individuals with disabilities. In
proposed Sec. 155.600(d) and (e), we cross-referenced Sec. 155.205(c)
and Sec. 155.230 respectively, which provide standards to ensure the
suggested protections are in place. As such, we do not believe that
additional standards are necessary in subpart G to ensure the
application process and eligibility notices are accessible to
individuals with LEP as well as those individuals with disabilities.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We finalize the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.600 of the
proposed rule with one modification and a few non-substantive technical
corrections for clarity. We finalize the definition of ``Indian tribe''
as proposed, but move the definition earlier in paragraph (a). We make
a technical correction for the purpose of clarity in finalizing the
definition of ``shared responsibility payment'' to specify that it
means the payment imposed with respect to a non-exempt individual. We
also include the definition of ``tax filer'' in paragraph (a) to
specify that it has the same meaning in subpart G as it does in Sec.
155.300(a).
b. Eligibility Standards for Exemptions (Sec. 155.605)
Under the program established in accordance with section 1411(a)(4)
of the Affordable Care Act for determining whether certificates of
exemption are to be issued by Exchanges under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of
the Affordable Care Act, we proposed that Exchanges would issue
certificates of exemption in the categories of religious conscience and
hardship. With respect to the other seven exemptions, for reasons set
forth below, we proposed that under the program provided for in section
1411(a)(4) of the Affordable Care Act, Exchanges would also issue
certificates of exemption with respect to three additional categories
(with exemptions also available through the tax filing process) based
on membership in a health care sharing ministry, membership in an
Indian tribe, and incarceration. In the four remaining exemption
categories, however, we proposed that under the program established
under section 1411(a)(4) of the Affordable Care Act, certificates would
not be issued by Exchanges under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the
Affordable Care Act, and instead individuals would claim an exemption
in one of those categories exclusively through the tax return filing
process with the IRS.
In paragraph (a) of Sec. 155.605, we proposed that except as
specified in paragraph (g), the Exchange would determine an applicant
eligible for and grant a certificate of exemption for a month if the
Exchange determines that he or she meets the requirements for one of
the categories of exemptions described in this section for at least one
day in the month, consistent with 26 CFR 1.5000A-3 of the Treasury
proposed rule. We noted that depending on the circumstances for each
specific proposed hardship exemption category, the certificate may be
provided for an entire calendar year or instead for a specific month or
period of months, including periods of time that stretch across more
than one calendar year.
We noted that an applicant could apply for multiple exemptions
simultaneously in case some are denied, and also receive any exemptions
for which he or she is eligible. We solicited comments on this
approach.
[[Page 39499]]
In paragraph (b), we proposed that except as specified, an
applicant is required to submit a new application for each year for
which an applicant wants to be considered for an exemption through the
Exchange, and that an exemption will only be provided for a calendar
year in which the applicant submitted an application for an exemption.
We provided exceptions for exemptions provided based on membership in
an Indian tribe and for religious conscience, in recognition that an
individual's qualification for these exemptions is expected to remain
the same from year to year. We also specified an exception for
hardship, since some categories of hardship will be provided for one or
more months and may be provided for periods of time that stretch across
more than one calendar year, and some categories of hardship can only
be provided after the close of a calendar year. We welcomed comments on
this approach and how the Exchange could expedite and streamline the
process.
We considered whether to specify that the Exchange send a notice to
each individual who had an exemption certificate from the Exchange for
a calendar year, in order to remind him or her about the opportunity to
apply to for an exemption for the following calendar year, and whether
this notice could be sent only at the individual's direction. We
solicited comments regarding the use of such a reminder and on a
renewal process more generally.
In paragraph (c), we proposed to codify the statutory eligibility
standards for the exemption based on religious conscience. In paragraph
(c)(1), we proposed that the Exchange would determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption for a month if he or she is a member of a
recognized religious sect or division described in section 1402(g)(1)
of the Code, and an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such
sect or division for such month, in accordance with 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(a)
of the Treasury proposed rule.
In paragraph (c)(2), we proposed eligibility standards regarding
the duration of the exemption for religious conscience. In paragraph
(c)(2)(i), we proposed that the Exchange grant the exemption for
religious conscience to an applicant that meets the standards of
paragraph (c)(1) of this section for a month on a continuing basis,
until such time that the applicant either reaches the age of 18, or
reports that he or she no longer meets the standards provided in (c)(1)
of this section.
We proposed to add paragraph (c)(2)(ii) to specify how the Exchange
should handle a situation in which an individual who has a certificate
of exemption based on religious conscience that was granted prior to
the individual reaching the age of 18. We proposed that the Exchange
send such an individual a notice when he or she reaches the age of 18
that informs the individual that he or she needs to submit a new
exemption application if he or she would like to maintain the
certificate of exemption.
We proposed to add paragraph (c)(3) to specify that the Exchange
will grant an exemption in this category prospectively or
retrospectively.
In paragraph (d), we proposed that the Exchange determine an
applicant eligible for an exemption for a month if the applicant is a
member of a health care sharing ministry for such month in accordance
with 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(b) of the Treasury proposed rule. We proposed
that an applicant who wanted to retain this exemption for an additional
calendar year would re-apply for this exemption each calendar year, and
that the Exchange may only provide an exemption in this category
retrospectively.
In paragraph (e), we proposed the eligibility standards for the
exemption based on incarceration. We specified that the Exchange would
determine an individual eligible for an exemption for a month that he
or she meets the definition specified in 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(d) of the
Treasury proposed rule. We proposed that the Exchange would only
provide this exemption for months in which an individual was
incarcerated, since there is no assurance that an incarcerated
individual will be released on the expected date.
In paragraph (f), we proposed eligibility standards for the
exemption based on membership in an Indian tribe. In paragraph (f)(1),
we proposed to codify that the Exchange would determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption for a month if he or she is a member of an
Indian tribe for such month, in accordance with 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(g) of
the Treasury proposed rule.
In paragraph (f)(2), we proposed eligibility standards regarding
the duration of the exemption for membership in an Indian tribe, such
that the Exchange would grant the exemption for membership in an Indian
tribe to an applicant who meets the standards of paragraph (f)(1) of
this section for a month on a continuing basis, until such time that
the individual reports that he or she no longer meets the standards
provided in (f)(1) of this section.
We proposed to add paragraph (f)(3) to specify that the Exchange
will grant an exemption in this category during the year prospectively
or retrospectively.
In paragraph (g), we proposed eligibility standards for the
exemption based on hardship, which is defined in section 5000A(e)(5) of
the Code as applying to ``any applicable individual who for any month
is determined by the Secretary under section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the
Affordable Care Act to have suffered a hardship with respect to the
capability to obtain coverage under a qualified health plan.'' In
developing some of these standards, we considered the standards
established by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We proposed some
specific time standards for each category of hardship, but we solicited
comments regarding whether these are appropriate, or if we should adopt
a more uniform approach across the category.
In paragraph (g)(1) of Sec. 155.605, we proposed that the Exchange
provide an exemption for hardship for a month or months in which an
applicant experienced financial or domestic circumstances, including an
unexpected natural or human-caused event, such that he or she has a
significant, unexpected increase in essential expenses; the expense of
purchasing minimum essential coverage would have caused him or her to
experience serious deprivation of food, shelter, clothing or other
necessities; or he or she has experienced other factors similar to
those described in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section that
prevented him or her from obtaining minimum essential coverage. We
proposed broad language to include a range of personal scenarios that
could negatively impact an applicant such that he or she would be
eligible for this exemption, and noted that we expected to clarify
these criteria in future guidance. We listed expected standards and
solicited comments on these criteria, including on whether additional
criteria should be established in regulation or guidance. We also
solicited comments regarding whether the proposed time standard could
be effectively implemented, or whether we should take a different
approach.
In paragraph (g)(2), we proposed that the Exchange provide an
exemption for hardship for a calendar year if an applicant, or another
individual for whom the applicant attests will be included in the
applicant's family (as defined in 26 CFR 1.5000A-1(d)(6) of the
Treasury proposed rule), is unable to afford coverage for such calendar
year in accordance with 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(e) of the Treasury proposed
rule, calculated using projected annual household income. We proposed
[[Page 39500]]
identical standards to those defined for the lack of affordable
coverage exemption in 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(e) of the Treasury proposed
rule, except that the Exchange would use projected household income to
determine whether coverage is affordable under this exemption, instead
of actual household income from the tax return for the year for which
the exemption is requested. We solicited comments regarding whether the
approach in paragraph (g)(5) of this section regarding the aggregate
cost of employer-sponsored coverage for all the employed members of the
family should also be applied in determining eligibility for this
hardship category.
We proposed that this exemption is not available for an application
that is submitted after the last date on which an applicant could
enroll in a QHP through the Exchange for a calendar year for which the
exemption is requested to ensure that an applicant can obtain the
information needed to make a purchasing decision, including for a
catastrophic plan, which is not applicable after the last date on which
enrollment would be possible.
We proposed in paragraph (g)(3) of Sec. 155.605 that the Exchange
provide an exemption for hardship for a calendar year if an individual
taxpayer who was not required to file an income tax return for such
calendar year because his or her gross income was below the filing
threshold, but who nevertheless filed to receive a tax benefit, claimed
a dependent who was required to file a tax return, and as a result had
household income exceeding the applicable return filing threshold
outlined in 26 CFR 1.5000A-3(f)(2) of the Treasury proposed rule.
We proposed to add paragraph (g)(4) to specify that the Exchange
provide an exemption for hardship for a calendar year for an individual
who has been determined ineligible for Medicaid for one or more months
during the benefit year solely as a result of a State not implementing
section 2001(a) of the Affordable Care Act. We sought comments on
whether this exemption should be limited to such individuals who are
also not eligible for advance payments of the premium tax credit (that
is, with projected household income below 100% of the poverty
threshold).
We proposed to add paragraph (g)(5) of Sec. 155.605 to specify
that the Exchange provide an exemption for hardship for a calendar year
if an applicant and one or more employed members of his or her family,
as defined in 26 CFR 1.5000A-1(d)(6) of the Treasury proposed rule, are
each determined eligible for self-only coverage in separate eligible
employer-sponsored plans that are affordable, pursuant to 26 CFR
1.5000A-3(e) of the Treasury proposed rule for one or more months
during the calendar year, but for whom the aggregate cost of employer-
sponsored coverage for all the employed members of the family exceeds 8
percent of the household income for that month or those months.
Lastly, as noted above, we proposed under our authority in section
1411(d)(4) of the Affordable Care Act that the Exchange would not issue
certifications of exemption with respect to household income below the
filing threshold (other than the limited hardship exemption proposed in
Sec. 155.605(g)(3) and described above); not being lawfully present;
short coverage gaps; and inability to afford coverage (other than the
limited hardship exemption proposed in Sec. 155.605(g)(2) and
described above). We specified that these exemptions would be available
solely through the tax filing process. We solicited comments on this
approach and if there were alternative approaches that HHS should
consider.
Comment: Multiple commenters expressed support for HHS' proposal to
allow an individual to apply for and enable the Exchange to grant
multiple exemptions, as well as the provision specifying that an
individual eligible for an exemption for at least one day of the month
receive the exemption for a full month. Another commenter expressed
broad support for the proposed exemptions process, but wanted HHS to
maintain its focus on ensuring individuals receive coverage through the
Exchange.
Response: In fulfilling the goals of the Affordable Care Act, we
are committed to ensuring that all individuals have access to quality,
affordable health coverage. Furthermore, as specified in the statute,
we are also committed to providing access to exemptions from the shared
responsibility payment to those individuals who meet specified
standards.
Comment: Commenters expressed differing opinions regarding whether
the Exchange should send notices to individuals in possession of
certain certificates of exemption at the end of a calendar year to
remind them of the need to submit an application for the same exemption
for the next calendar year. Several commenters wanted HHS to specify
that the Exchange send such a reminder notice that would arrive during
open enrollment, to allow an individual to make the appropriate
purchasing decision. Another commenter opposed specifying that the
Exchange send such a reminder notice, noting that most exemptions are
meant to be temporary, and that the primary goal of the Exchange should
be ensuring that individuals have access to coverage.
Response: We will maintain the language as proposed, which does not
specify that Exchanges will send an additional reminder notice to an
individual at the end of a calendar year. Pursuant to the eligibility
standards for exemptions described throughout Sec. 155.605,
individuals have broad flexibility in terms of the time periods which
Exchanges will grant exemptions, and thus we do not believe the
corresponding administrative burden on Exchanges to send an additional
notice is outweighed by the benefits of such a notice for individuals.
We note that an Exchange also has the flexibility to send such a notice
at its discretion.
Comment: Several commenters raised concerns regarding our proposed
codification of the eligibility standards for the religious conscience
exemption specified in the Affordable Care Act. Some commenters
expressed philosophical opposition to the notion that the government
would exempt individuals for religious purposes. Other commenters
opposed our proposal to allow children of individuals in recognized
religious sects or divisions to be exempt in addition to their parents.
Commenters believed that as a result, parents would not have to
maintain minimum essential coverage for their dependent children, which
they feared would permit parents to avoid caring for their children's
health.
Response: Section 5000A(d)(2) of the Code, as added by section
1501(b) of the Affordable Care Act, establishes the religious
conscience exemption. We note that state laws governing domestic
relations allow parents to attest on behalf of minor children, which
was the basis of our proposal. We note that we do not intend this
provision to modify or supersede any other laws regarding health
responsibility for children.
Comment: One commenter suggested the IRS or the Social Security
Administration (SSA) is better positioned to determine eligibility for
the religious conscience exemption. Furthermore, the commenter
expressed concerns about how the Exchange should handle an appeal when
a religious sect is not recognized by the SSA. The commenter indicated
that it would be more appropriate for an individual to instead appeal
to IRS or SSA in this situation as opposed to the Exchange.
Response: As noted above, the statute specifies that the religious
conscience
[[Page 39501]]
exemption may only be granted by the Exchange. We are working closely
with the SSA to define an appropriate process to address religious
sects that are not yet recognized, and we clarify in Sec.
155.615(b)(4) that if an applicant attests to membership in a religious
sect or division that is not recognized by the Social Security
Administration as an approved religious sect or division under section
1402(g)(1) of the Code, the Exchange must provide the applicant with
information regarding how his or her religious sect or division can
pursue recognition under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, and determine
the applicant ineligible for this exemption until such time as the
Exchange obtains information indicating that the religious sect or
division has been approved. We agree with the commenter that the
Exchange is not an ideal venue for an appeal of a denial that was based
on a finding that a sect or division did not meet the statutory
requirements. We intend to provide further guidance on this process in
collaboration with the SSA.
Comment: One commenter requested that HHS expand the religious
sects and divisions whose members qualify for the religious conscience
exemption.
Response: HHS does not have the authority to expand the criteria
set in the statute, which reference section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, and
so we are finalizing the cross-reference to the statutory criteria as
proposed.
Comment: Commenters expressed differing opinions regarding our
proposal that when an individual who has a religious conscience
exemption turns 18, he or she must re-apply for the exemption in order
to maintain it. One commenter opposed specifying that the Exchange send
a notice, instead arguing that the individual turning 18 should be
responsible for reapplying without a prompt. Another commenter noted
that based on the practices of the religious sects and divisions that
this exemption covers, HHS should modify this provision such that the
age standard is 21.
Response: In response to comments, to align with other Affordable
Care Act definitions of children, and to reduce burden on individuals
under the age of 21, we are modifying this provision in the final rule
to specify that individuals receiving the religious conscience
exemption will have to re-apply for the exemption upon turning 21. We
will maintain the provision specifying that the Exchange send a notice
prompting an individual to reapply upon turning 21, since this notice
is needed to notify him or her that his or her exemption will end
absent a new application. Nothing precludes individuals affected by
this change from obtaining coverage on their own.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Exchange should have the
flexibility not to grant exemptions based on membership in a health
care sharing ministry or incarceration. The commenter noted the limited
benefit for individuals in having an Exchange grant such exemptions
since the proposed rule specifies that they are only available through
the Exchange retrospectively within a calendar year, and are otherwise
available through the tax filing process.
Response: We believe that individuals will benefit from the
opportunity to receive the exemptions based on membership in a health
care sharing ministry or incarceration through the Exchange in addition
to through the tax filing process, and as such, are finalizing the
provision as proposed.
Comment: One commenter suggested that HHS clarify the language used
in Sec. 155.605(c)(3) and (f)(3) such that the text of the regulation
appropriately describe the flexibility for Exchanges to grant an
exemption in these categories retrospectively or prospectively.
Response: In proposed Sec. 155.605(c)(3) and (f)(3), we specified
that the Exchange ``must provide an exemption in this category
prospectively or retrospectively.'' The intent of this provision was
not to allow flexibility to the Exchange whether or not to grant the
exemption but, rather, to specify that the Exchange will provide an
exemption in these categories retrospectively, prospectively, or both,
depending on the period of time for which such an exemption is
requested and the period of time for which an applicant meets the
criteria for such an exemption. Accordingly, we have modified the
language in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) to specify as
appropriate when the Exchange must make the various categories of
exemptions available prospectively or retrospectively.
Comment: One commenter expressed support for HHS' proposal that the
Exchange grant the exemption based on membership in an Indian tribe as
long as individuals still maintained the opportunity to file for this
exemption through the tax filing process. Another commenter suggested
that Exchanges should not grant exemptions based on membership in an
Indian tribe, but that rather such exemption should only be available
through the tax filing process. Alternatively, this commenter said that
if the Exchange does grant this exemption, it should only do so
prospectively.
Response: We believe that individuals will benefit from the
opportunity to receive the exemption based on membership in an Indian
tribe through the Exchange in addition to through the tax filing
process. Furthermore, we do not believe that granting this
retrospectively and prospectively will result in significant burden for
the Exchange, since no work is necessary to determine eligibility for
this exemption retrospectively beyond what would be necessary to
determine eligibility for it prospectively. Accordingly, we are
finalizing this provision as proposed.
Comment: Some commenters expressed concerns about the definition of
Indian tribe proposed in Sec. 155.600(a), which referred to section
45A(c)(6) of the Code. These commenters recommended a broader
definition of Indian for purposes of an exemption. Several commenters
recommended that HHS add a hardship exemption category for Indians as
defined in 42 CFR 447.50, and another commenter suggested that
Exchanges add a hardship exemption category for individuals who are
eligible to receive services provided by the Indian Health Service
(IHS) pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 1680c(a) or (b). A commenter asked HHS to
specify that the duration for these hardship exemptions would parallel
the duration of the exemption for a member of an Indian tribe.
Response: We have thoroughly reviewed the definitions of the term
``Indian'' in the Affordable Care Act. HHS does not have the legal
authority to modify through regulation the statutory definitions of
``Indian'' as referenced in the Affordable Care Act. There is no
administrative flexibility to align these definitions. Any changes to
the definition must be legislative. In response to comments, we added a
category of hardship exemption in Sec. 155.605(g)(6) for an individual
who is not a member of a federally-recognized tribe, and is an Indian
eligible for services through an Indian health care provider, as
defined in 42 CFR 447.50, or an individual eligible for services
through IHS in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3). We
also redesignate proposed Sec. 155.615(f)(3) as Sec. 155.615(f)(4),
and add new Sec. 155.615 to specify that the Exchange will use the
same verification procedures for this exemption as it will use for the
exemption for members of a federally-recognized tribe. We also note
that the duration of this exemption mirrors that as provided for
members of federally-recognized tribes, such that whether it is granted
prospectively or retrospectively, it is granted for a month on a
continuing basis until the individuals specified above report a
[[Page 39502]]
change in their eligibility status for this exemption. This ensures
that the individuals specified above who have access to health care
through the IHS, Tribes and Tribal organizations, and urban Indian
organizations (I/T/U) are treated in the same manner as members of
federally-recognized tribes for purposes of the individual shared
responsibility payment.
Comment: Multiple commenters expressed overall support for our
proposal in Sec. 155.605(g)(1), whereby the Exchange would determine
an individual eligible for a hardship exemption based on circumstances
that resulted in an unexpected increase in essential expenses that
prevented an individual from obtaining coverage under a qualified
health plan. One commenter suggested that HHS should provide further
flexibility to allow Exchanges to define additional eligibility
criteria for this exemption. Another commenter expressed support for
HHS providing minimum standards for hardship. While we mentioned
several examples of events that would qualify as hardships in preamble,
based on standards used for similar purposes in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, some commenters wanted HHS to clarify in the final text
of the regulation that an applicant who met the circumstances discussed
in the preamble as well as other circumstances used in Massachusetts
but not specifically mentioned in preamble would qualify for a hardship
exemption.
Response: In preamble to the proposed rule, we noted that we
expected to clarify detailed hardship criteria in future guidance.
Accordingly, to assist Exchanges in determining eligibility for a
hardship exemption for an individual who experienced circumstances that
prevented him or her from obtaining coverage under a QHP, we are
publishing guidance simultaneously with this rule that provides
detailed criteria for this exemption.
Comment: One commenter recommended that Exchanges have greater
flexibility in determining the duration of a single exemption,
particularly due to the many circumstances that could be covered by the
hardship exemption. Several commenters recommended that HHS provide
Exchanges with clearer guidance regarding the duration of hardship
exemptions that could be granted according to Sec. 155.605(g)(1),
including events that may span multiple calendar years. Some commenters
urged that in particular situations, such as those where victims suffer
natural and human-caused disasters, Exchanges should grant exemptions
that last 2 years. Other commenters suggested that any hardship
exemption be provided for a minimum of 6 months or a year. One
commenter recommended that the Exchange grant a hardship exemption for
more than a calendar year if an individual experiences an event that
occurs across 2-calendar years. Another commenter requested
clarification regarding the language in Sec. 155.605(a) specifying
that the Exchange would provide an exemption for a month if the
Exchange determines that an individual meets the requirements for an
exemption for at least one day of the month, with the exception of
Sec. 155.605(g).
Response: In response to comments, we clarify that a hardship
exemption granted under Sec. 155.605(g)(1) will at minimum be provided
for the month before the hardship, the month or months of the hardship,
and the month after the hardship, and that Exchanges have flexibility
to provide it for additional months after the hardship, consistent with
the circumstances of the hardship. This ensures that such a hardship
exemption addresses the time period where an individual actually
experienced the hardship, while also providing flexibility for
Exchanges to evaluate the particular circumstances of an event that may
necessitate an extended duration of an exemption. As such, the hardship
exemptions provided under Sec. 155.605(g)(1), which will be provided
before and after the occurrence of when the individual actually
experienced the hardship, necessitate an exception in regards to the
general provision of Sec. 155.605(a).
Comment: Numerous commenters urged HHS to specify additional
categories of hardship exemptions outside of those proposed or to
expand the scope of certain categories of hardship exemptions as
proposed. These suggestions include providing hardship exemptions for:
Employees who have an offer of self-only employer-sponsored coverage
that costs less than 8 percent of household income, but for whom family
coverage costs more than 8 percent of household income; individuals
with income less than 150 percent of the FPL; individuals for whom the
aggregate cost of employer-sponsored coverage (not only employed
members) exceeds 8 percent of household income for that month(s);
individuals and families with household income below 250 percent of the
FPL that are offered affordable employer-sponsored coverage (less than
8 percent of household income), but the amount that the individual or
family would have to pay for the lowest-cost bronze plan on the
Exchange exceeds 8 percent of household income; individuals and their
dependents who have an offer of employer-sponsored coverage that is
affordable but that does not provide minimum value; individuals
participating in special non-minimum essential coverage programs that
already require financial determinations by a state; individuals who
already receive certain kinds of public assistance benefits; or
individuals who in good faith attempted to purchase insurance but were
unable to do so based on limited enrollment opportunities.
Response: As specified in guidance published simultaneously with
this final rule, we have identified several events that Exchanges can
refer to in order to help them in determining eligibility for hardship
exemptions. These will also be the detailed criteria used by the
Federally-facilitated Exchange. Due to the broad range of circumstances
that will qualify an individual for a hardship exemption, we do not
believe that further categories of exemptions need to be added to the
text of the regulation. However, as discussed further below, we have
modified the eligibility standards for the hardship exemption for
situations in which coverage is unaffordable based on projected income
such that if an individual and his or her dependents have an offer of
employer-sponsored coverage that does not meet the minimum value
standard, the Exchange will not consider this offer in determining
affordability. Rather, in such a situation, the Exchange will consider
affordability based on the lowest-cost offer of employer-sponsored
coverage that does meet the minimum value standard, and if no such
offer exists, on the cost of the applicable lowest cost bronze plan in
the relevant rating area of the Exchange, reduced by any available
advance payments of the premium tax credit. This is similar to the
considerations for eligibility for advance payments of the premium tax
credit based on eligibility for coverage in an eligible employer-
sponsored plan, which take into account both cost and minimum value.
Comment: One commenter expressed concerns about the burden on
Exchanges to handle eligibility determinations for exemptions,
including the hardship exemption, as they viewed the eligibility
determination process for exemptions as more appropriately handled
through the tax filing process, particularly when exemptions are not
available prospectively through the Exchange. Some commenters supported
the
[[Page 39503]]
proposed hardship exemption at Sec. 155.605(g)(3) (related to the tax
filing threshold), while another commenter stated that the proposed
hardship exemption at Sec. 155.605(g)(3) should not be granted by the
Exchange as it concerned tax filing. Other commenters generally
supported the hardship exemption proposed at Sec. 155.605(g)(5)
(related to affordable self-only coverage), even if suggesting
modifications as noted above, for employed members determined eligible
for affordable self-only insurance, but for whom the aggregate cost of
employer-sponsored coverage for all the employed members of the family
exceeds 8 percent of household income.
Response: Based on comments received, and in order to minimize
burden on Exchanges while ensuring efficient processing of exemptions
applications, we will modify Sec. 155.605(g) such that the hardship
exemptions proposed at Sec. 155.605(g)(3) and (5) will be provided
exclusively through the tax filing process, and not by the Exchange.
These exemptions necessitate information that will only be available at
the time of tax filing, such that if they were exclusively available
through the Exchange, an individual would need to file a tax return,
request an exemption from the Exchange, receive a determination from
the Exchange, and depending on the determination, potentially amend his
or her return. Accordingly, to streamline the process for consumers, we
grant limited authority to the IRS to administer these two hardship
exemptions. We note that we will continue to consider the
administrative feasibility of Exchanges granting the hardship exemption
under Sec. 155.605(g)(5) after the conclusion of the first year of
operations.
Comment: Commenters expressed broad support for our proposal at
Sec. 155.605(g)(4) to provide a hardship exemption for individuals
ineligible for Medicaid in states that chose not to expand Medicaid
under the Affordable Care Act, but expressed differing opinions
regarding whether such a hardship exemption should be limited to those
individuals who are not determined eligible for advance payments of the
premium tax credit. Some commenters supported the policy as proposed
based on affordability concerns even for those individuals eligible for
advance payments of the premium tax credit, while others suggested that
the individuals who are eligible for advance payments of the premium
tax credit should not be eligible to receive a hardship exemption.
Response: We appreciate the concerns raised by commenters arguing
both for and against maintaining this hardship exemption as proposed.
We continue to believe that it is appropriate that individuals, even
those eligible for advance payments of the premium tax credit, to be
eligible for this hardship exemption if ineligible for Medicaid solely
as a result of a state that chose not to expand Medicaid eligibility
under the Affordable Care Act. We expect that these exemptions will be
provided through the eligibility process for coverage, and note that
notwithstanding receiving a hardship exemption, such individuals may
still decide to enroll in a QHP and receive advance payments of the
premium tax credit in this situation. We also note that these
exemptions will be available retrospectively following the close of a
coverage year.
Comment: Several commenters expressed general support for Sec.
155.605(g)(2), which provides a hardship exemption based on projected
annual household income. However, some commenters believed that this
still did not fully address the consequences of 26 CFR 1.36B-
2(c)(3)(v)(A)(2) concerning the affordability of an eligible employer-
sponsored plan for a related individual. One commenter requested
clarification as to whether this hardship exemption applied to the
individual or the entire tax filing unit. Another commenter did not
support limiting the availability of this hardship exemption only
within open enrollment periods.
Response: We note that while the lack of affordable coverage based
on projected income hardship exemption and the lack of affordable
coverage exemption described in section 5000A(e)(1) of the Code address
certain situations where a related individual is ineligible for advance
payments of the premium tax credit based on 26 CFR 1.36B-
2(c)(3)(v)(A)(2), these provisions are not intended to provide an
exemption in all cases in which an individual may be ineligible for
advance payments of the premium tax credit.
We finalize this exemption to generally follow the standards in
section 5000A(e)(1) of the Code. As in the proposed rule, we specify in
paragraph (g)(2)(i) of the final rule that this exemption differs from
the exemption described in section 5000A(e)(1) of the Code in that it
relies on projected household income. In order to facilitate
implementation of this exemption, we add paragraphs (g)(2)(ii), (iii),
and (iv) to clarify the applicable standards. First, in paragraph
(g)(2)(ii), we clarify that as described above, the Exchange will only
consider the affordability of an eligible employer-sponsored plan for
this exemption if it meets the minimum value standard. Second, in
paragraph (g)(2)(iii), we describe how the Exchange will determine the
cost of coverage for an individual who is eligible to purchase coverage
under an eligible employer-sponsored plan.
We note that, under the Treasury proposed rule, the standards for
determining the required contribution for coverage through an eligible
employer-sponsored plan vary depending on whether an individual is an
employee eligible to purchase coverage under an eligible employer-
sponsored plan through the employee's employer, or is eligible to
purchase coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan because of
a relationship to an employee, with respect to eligibility for an
exemption. For an individual employee who is eligible through his or
her own employer, the affordability calculation is based on the lowest
cost option for self-only coverage. For all other individuals eligible
to purchase coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan, the
required contribution is the portion of the annual premium that the
employee would pay for the lowest cost option for family coverage that
would cover the employee and all individuals who are included in the
employee's family and are not otherwise exempt. We note that the
Exchange will only know whether an individual within the employee's
family has been granted an exemption by that Exchange. Accordingly, we
specify in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(C) that the Exchange will consider the
lowest cost family coverage that meets the minimum value standard and
would cover the employee and all other individuals who are included in
the employee's family who have not otherwise been granted an exemption
through the Exchange.
We also note that proposed 26 CFR 1.36B-2(c)(3)(v)(A)(4) (78 FR
25914), provides that for purposes of determining eligibility for the
premium tax credit, the affordability of coverage in an eligible
employer-sponsored plan is determined by assuming that each employee
satisfies the requirements of available nondiscriminatory wellness
programs related to tobacco use, and does not satisfy the requirements
of any available wellness programs that are not related to tobacco use.
That is, if a plan includes a nondiscriminatory wellness program for
tobacco users, such as smoking cessation classes, the affordability of
coverage under that plan will be determined based on the premium that
is charged to tobacco
[[Page 39504]]
users who complete this program. In the preamble to proposed 26 CFR
1.36B-2(c)(3)(v)(4) (78 FR 25911), Treasury also noted that it expects
to specify that this treatment of nondiscriminatory wellness programs
will also be used in determining the required contribution for purposes
of the lack of affordable coverage exemption under section 5000A(e)(1)
of the Code.
Accordingly, in order to ensure that an individual is not liable
for the shared responsibility payment if he or she is ineligible for
advance payments of the premium tax credit and cost-sharing reductions
as a result of a finding by the Exchange that he or she is eligible for
qualifying coverage in an eligible employer-sponsored plan based on
incorporating the completion of a tobacco-related wellness program, we
specify in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(A) that the Exchange will determine
eligibility for the exemption specified in paragraph (g)(2) for an
individual who uses tobacco without incorporating any discount
resulting from the completion of a wellness program designed to prevent
or reduce tobacco use. We also specify in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(B) that
discounts from wellness incentives offered by an eligible employer-
sponsored plan that do not relate to tobacco use are treated as not
earned.
In paragraph (g)(2)(iv), we clarify that in the case of an
individual who is ineligible to purchase coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan, or only eligible to purchase coverage under an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that does not meet the minimum value
standard, the Exchange will determine the required contribution for
coverage in accordance with section 5000A(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the Code,
inclusive of all members of the individual's family who have not
otherwise been granted an exemption through the Exchange, and who are
not treated as eligible to purchase coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan that meets the minimum value standard. This
determination is based on the premium for the single lowest cost bronze
plan available, less any credit allowable under section 36B of the
Code, in the individual market through the Exchange serving the rating
area in which the individual resides.
Furthermore, we clarify that in finalizing this provision, we
specify in paragraphs (g)(2)(v) and (g)(2)(vi) that this exemption will
be available throughout the calendar year prospectively for a month or
months until the last date on which an individual could enroll in a QHP
through the calendar year for which the exemption is requested. This
refers not only to the open enrollment period, but to any special
enrollment period, notwithstanding special effective dates, for which
an individual may potentially be determined eligible during the
calendar year under 45 CFR 155.420(b). As such, an individual may be
determined eligible for this exemption for the remaining month or
months of a calendar year as late as November of that calendar year, as
the effective dates for a special enrollment period under Sec.
155.420(b) would still allow such an individual to enroll in a QHP by
December of that calendar year. Lastly, in order to reduce
administrative burden, we also specify in paragraph (g)(2)(vi) that an
exemption in this category will be provided for all remaining months in
a coverage year, notwithstanding any change in an individual's
circumstances.
Comment: Some commenters wanted to ensure that Exchanges would
provide clear and easily understandable information to explain
different exemptions available to individuals, including the steps
needed to apply for an exemption.
Response: We recognize the need for consumer information that
explains the available exemptions as well as the necessary
documentation and steps needed for individuals to apply. We expect to
work with states and other stakeholders to ensure that individuals are
properly educated about the exemption eligibility process.
Comment: One commenter wanted to ensure that the Exchange would
issue a certificate of exemption to any individual who is qualified and
not limit the availability of certificates to only those individuals
who are seeking coverage through the Exchange.
Response: We agree with the commenter that the Exchange will not
limit certificates of exemption to individuals who are seeking coverage
through the Exchange. We note that a hardship exemption will allow an
individual to enroll in a catastrophic plan, both inside and outside
the Exchange, and the Exchange may not limit the availability of an
exemption contingent on an individual seeking coverage through the
Exchange or elsewhere. Further, while a portion of the eligibility
process for the hardship exemption proposed in Sec. 155.605(g)(4) for
individuals who are determined ineligible for Medicaid based on a
state's choice not to expand Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable
Care Act relies on the eligibility process for Medicaid, proposed Sec.
155.610(a) specifies that the Exchange will generally use a separate
application for exemptions. We finalize this provision as proposed.
Comment: One commenter was supportive of HHS' decision not to
specify that the Exchange would grant the exemption specified in
section 5000A(d)(3) of the Code for individuals who are not lawfully
present, but also recommended clear guidance and instructions regarding
individuals who nevertheless attempt to apply for this exemption
through the Exchange to ensure that the Exchange will follow the
appropriate privacy and confidentiality protections, and also to direct
individuals to claim this exemption through the tax filing process.
Response: We note that the privacy and confidentiality protections
in 45 CFR 155.260 apply to the exemption eligibility process, and are
sufficient to address these concerns. Furthermore, we expect that the
Exchange will provide clear guidance regarding the exemptions available
through the Exchange as well as the exemptions that can be claimed
solely through the tax filing process, in order to appropriately direct
individuals.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.605 of the
proposed rule with the following modifications: We make technical
corrections in paragraphs (c) through (g) for the purpose of clarity to
specify when the Exchange must make different exemptions available,
whether prospectively or retrospectively. In paragraph (c)(2)
concerning the duration of the exemption for religious conscience, we
specify that an exemption in this category will be provided on a
continuing basis until the month after the month of the individual's
21st birthday, and as such if an Exchange granted such an individual an
exemption prior to the age of 21, would have to send the applicant a
notice at that point to remind him or her to submit a new application
to maintain the certificate of exemption. We make revisions throughout
paragraph (g) to specify which hardship exemptions must be granted by
the Exchange, and which can be claimed only through the tax filing
process. We clarify that an Exchange will determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption under paragraph (g)(1) of this section for
the month before, a month or months during which they experience the
circumstances that qualify as a hardship, and the month after. We make
a technical correction in paragraph (g)(1)(i) to clarify that the
financial or domestic circumstances caused a significant and unexpected
increase in
[[Page 39505]]
essential expenses that prevented the individual from obtaining
coverage under a QHP. We make a technical correction in paragraphs
(g)(1)(ii) to replace ``minimum essential coverage'' with ``qualified
health plan'' to align with the statutory language describing the
hardship exemption, and modify paragraph (g)(1)(iii) to clarify that
Exchange will determine an individual eligible for a hardship exemption
if he or she experienced circumstances that prevented him or her from
obtaining coverage under a QHP in accordance with the statute.
We add paragraph (g)(2)(ii) to clarify that the Exchange will only
consider the affordability of an eligible employer-sponsored plan for
the exemption described in paragraph (g)(2) if the eligible employer-
sponsored plan meets the minimum value standard. We add paragraph
(g)(2)(iii) to clarify the applicable standards if an individual is
eligible for coverage through an eligible employer-sponsored plan that
meets the minimum value standard, and note in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(A)
that an individual who uses tobacco is treated as not earning any
premium incentive related to participation in a wellness program
designed to prevent or reduce tobacco use that is offered by an
eligible employer-sponsored plan, and in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(B) that
discounts from wellness incentives offered by an eligible employer-
sponsored plan that do not relate to tobacco use are treated as not
earned. That is, for purposes of this exemption, the cost of an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that includes a premium differential
for smokers and non-smokers is calculated using the non-smoker premium
for non-smokers, and the smoker premium for smokers, without any
discounts that may be available through smoking cessation programs. We
outline the appropriate methods to determine the required contribution
for coverage through an eligible employer-sponsored plan that meets the
minimum value standard in paragraphs (g)(2)(iii)(C) and (D), depending
on whether an individual is an employee eligible to purchase coverage
under an eligible employer-sponsored plan through the employee's
employer, or is eligible to purchase coverage under an eligible
employer-sponsored plan by reason of a relationship to an employee. We
specify in paragraph (g)(2)(iii)(D) that the Exchange will consider the
lowest cost family coverage that meets the minimum value standard that
would cover the employee and all other individuals who are included in
the employee's family who have not otherwise been granted an exemption
through the Exchange. We specify in paragraph (g)(2)(iv) that the
Exchange will determine the required contribution for coverage in the
individual market in the case of an individual who is ineligible to
purchase coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan in
accordance with section 5000A(e)(1)(B)(i) of the Code, or eligible only
to purchase coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan that
does not meet the minimum value standard, inclusive of all members of
the individual's family who have not otherwise been granted an
exemption through the Exchange, or are treated as eligible to purchase
coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan that meets the
minimum value standard. We also clarify in paragraphs (g)(2)(v) and
(g)(2)(vi) that this exemption will be available throughout the
calendar year prospectively for a month or months until the last date
on which an individual could enroll in a QHP through the calendar year
for which the exemption is requested, and that the Exchange will
provide an exemption in this category for all remaining months in a
coverage year, notwithstanding any change in an individual's
circumstances.
We clarify that the Exchange may not grant the hardship exemptions
under paragraph (g)(3) and (5) of this section, but rather only the IRS
will allow an applicant to claim these exemptions. We add paragraph
(g)(6) to provide that an Exchange will determine an applicant eligible
for a hardship exemption for any month for which he or she is an Indian
eligible for services through an Indian health care provider, as
defined in 42 CFR 447.50, or an individual eligible for services
through the Indian Health Service in accordance with 25 U.S.C.
1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3). We clarify that the duration for the
exemption provided under paragraph (g)(6) of this section is the same
as specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this section.
c. Eligibility Process for Exemptions (Sec. 155.610)
In Sec. 155.610, we proposed the process by which the Exchange
would determine an applicant's eligibility for exemptions. In paragraph
(a), we proposed to specify that the Exchange would use an application
established by HHS in order to collect the information necessary to
determine eligibility and grant a certificate of exemption for an
applicant, unless the Exchange receives approval to use an alternative
application. We also clarified that in cases in which relevant
information has already been collected through the eligibility process
for enrollment in a QHP and for insurance affordability programs, the
Exchange would use this information for the purpose of eligibility for
an exemption to the maximum extent possible.
In paragraph (b), we proposed that the Exchange may seek approval
from HHS for an alternative application. We further specified that such
alternative application must only request the minimum information
necessary for the purposes identified in paragraph (a) of this section.
In noting that there are exemptions that share common data and
verifications with the eligibility process for enrollment in a QHP and
for insurance affordability programs, in paragraph (c) we proposed that
if an individual submits the application in 45 CFR 155.405 and then
requests an exemption, the Exchange would use the information collected
on the application for coverage and not duplicate any verification
processes that share the standards specified in this subpart. We
solicited comments on how best to coordinate these processes to ensure
maximum administrative simplicity for all involved parties.
In paragraph (d), we proposed the Exchange would accept the
application for an exemption from an application filer, and provide
tools for the submission of an application. We did not specify
particular channels for application acceptance, but we solicited
comments regarding whether we should specify some or all of the
channels included in 45 CFR 155.405.
In paragraph (e), we proposed that the Exchange would specify that
an applicant who has a social security number (SSN) will provide such
number to the Exchange in order to coordinate information in the tax
filing process and provide the Exchange with additional information
with which to ensure program integrity. However, we proposed to clarify
in paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) that the Exchange may not require an
individual who is not seeking an exemption for him or herself to
provide a SSN, except that the Exchange would require an application
filer to provide the SSN for a non-applicant tax filer only if the
applicant attests that the tax filer has a SSN and filed a tax return
for the year for which tax data would be utilized to verify household
income and family size for a hardship exemption. We solicited comments
on the applicability of this provision in the context of the exemption
eligibility process.
In paragraph (f), we proposed that the Exchange would grant a
certificate of exemption to any applicant determined
[[Page 39506]]
eligible in accordance with the standards for exemptions provided in
Sec. 155.605.
In paragraph (g)(1), we proposed that the Exchange determine
eligibility for exemptions promptly and without undue delay, which is
the same timing threshold used throughout subpart D of this part,
including in 45 CFR 155.310(e)(1), with respect to eligibility
determinations for enrollment in a QHP and for insurance affordability
programs. In paragraph (g)(2), we proposed that the assessment of
timeliness of eligibility determinations by the Exchange is based on
the period from the date of the application until the date on which the
Exchange notifies the applicant of its decision. We solicited comments
regarding specific performance standards for the eligibility process
described in this subpart, and whether we should define an outer bound
in which an eligibility determination will be made.
In paragraph (h), we proposed to clarify that except for the
exemptions for religious conscience and membership in an Indian tribe
proposed in Sec. 155.605(c) and Sec. 155.605(f), respectively, after
December 31 of a given calendar year, the Exchange will not accept an
application for an exemption for months for such calendar year. We
intended to specify that this provision also apply to the hardship
exemption under Sec. 155.605(g), but inadvertently did not include
such language in the text of the regulation. We solicited comments
regarding this approach, and whether there should be additional
categories of exemptions for which the Exchange would grant exemptions
after the close of a calendar year.
In paragraph (i), we proposed that the Exchange provide timely
written notice to an applicant of any eligibility determination for an
exemption made in accordance with this subpart, which could be provided
through electronic means, consistent with Sec. 155.230(d).
In paragraph (j), we proposed that an individual who has been
certified by an Exchange as qualifying for an exemption retain the
records that demonstrate not only receipt of the certificate of
exemption but also qualification for the underlying exemption. We noted
that to the extent that the Exchange provides a certificate of
exemption for which the underlying verification is based in part on the
special circumstances exception proposed in Sec. 155.615(h), an
individual would retain records that demonstrate receipt of the
certificate of exemption, as well as the circumstances that warranted
the use of the special circumstances exception.
Comment: Commenters were generally supportive of our proposals
throughout this section. One commenter suggested that HHS codify the
preamble language specifying that individuals could apply for multiple
exemptions simultaneously. Another commenter sought clearer standards
regarding the eligibility process for exemptions in order to limit
administrative burden.
Response: We believe that the language proposed in this section
provides the appropriate amount of detail to guide the Exchange in
establishing an efficient process for exemptions, while also allowing
for the Exchange to have the necessary flexibility to administer these
processes effectively. We clarify that while we believe individuals
will benefit from the opportunity to seek multiple exemptions
simultaneously, we feel that the existing regulation text is
sufficient, and so are finalizing it as proposed.
Comment: One commenter recommended that HHS revise the language in
Sec. 155.610(a) to clarify that except as specified, the Exchange must
use an application established by HHS to collect only the information
that is ``strictly'' necessary for determining eligibility for an
exemption. Another commenter wanted HHS to cross-reference to Sec.
155.260 so that information collected on the exemption application was
subject to the appropriate security and privacy protections.
Response: We share the commenter's concern regarding Exchanges
using an exemptions application that minimizes the information
individuals must provide to receive an eligibility determination for an
exemption, and is subject to robust privacy and security protections.
We believe that the comment regarding limiting requests for information
to only what is necessary is addressed in proposed Sec. 155.615(j),
which limits the ability of the Exchange to require the provision of
information by an applicant to support the eligibility process for
exemptions to the minimum necessary, and is finalized as proposed. We
also note that Sec. 155.260(a) already includes language specifying
that the provisions of Sec. 155.260 apply to the exemptions process.
Accordingly, we are not including additional language in this final
regulation.
Comment: Commenters made several suggestions with the goal of
enhancing the efficiency of the coverage and exemptions application
processes. Several commenters supported our proposals to re-use
information from the coverage application for the purposes of
exemptions eligibility determinations when possible in order to prevent
collecting duplicate information. One commenter recommended combining
the coverage application and exemptions application in order to
streamline the eligibility determination process for both enrollment in
a QHP and exemptions, reduce burden on individuals and Exchanges, and
inform an applicant of all potential coverage or exemptions options
based on his or her particular circumstances.
Response: As noted in our proposed rule, we continue to believe
that where possible, individuals who apply for coverage should not have
to provide duplicate information to the Exchange if they subsequently
decide to apply for an exemption. We also believe that it is important
to have separate applications for coverage and exemptions to avoid
creating burden on those individuals who are only seeking coverage or
exemptions. Accordingly, we are finalizing these provisions as
proposed.
Comment: One commenter viewed the language in Sec. 155.610(c)
regarding the reuse of information collected through the eligibility
process for enrollment in a QHP through the Exchange and for insurance
affordability programs as confusing, and recommended the phrase ``that
adhere to the standards specified in this subpart'' be eliminated.
Response: We are modifying this language to clarify that when an
Exchange has verified information through the eligibility process for
enrollment in a QHP through the Exchange and for insurance
affordability programs, and such verifications occur in accordance with
the standards specified in this subpart, the Exchange may not repeat
the verification for purposes of determining eligibility for an
exemption. For example, we note that the verification procedures for
the exemption for members of an Indian tribe cross-references the
verification procedures in subpart D of this part; accordingly, if the
Exchange verified that an individual meets the standards through the
eligibility process for enrollment in a QHP and for insurance
affordability programs, and such an individual subsequently requests an
exemption based on membership in an Indian tribe, the Exchange will not
repeat the verification.
Comment: Commenters urged that the Exchange allow individuals to
apply for an exemption via the same channels as the coverage
application, including online, by telephone, by mail, and in person.
One commenter raised particular concerns in terms of allowing
individuals to have the full range of options to apply for a religious
conscience exemption.
[[Page 39507]]
Response: We are committed to providing an efficient and consumer-
friendly application process for exemptions. In Sec. 155.610(d)(3), we
specify that for applications submitted before October 15, 2014, the
Exchange must, at a minimum, accept such applications in paper, via
mail. We believe that this will ensure the availability of an effective
process within the time constraints that the Exchange is facing for
implementation, while allowing for state flexibility to utilize other
channels sooner than October 15, 2014. We intend to discuss the
availability of applications through other channels beginning on or
after October 15, 2014 in a future regulation.
Comment: Several commenters appreciated HHS' proposal in Sec.
155.610(e)(2) that the Exchange may not require an individual who is
seeking an exemption on behalf of someone else other than himself or
herself to provide a SSN. However, another commenter expressed concerns
that the broad language used here would prevent the collection of a SSN
who are not seeking an exemption, but rather are applying for
enrollment in a QHP.
Response: We appreciate the commenter's concerns, and note that
Sec. 155.610(e)(2) only applies to subpart G regarding eligibility
determinations for exemptions, whereas 45 CFR 155.310(a)(3) provides
the standards for collecting Social Security numbers as part of the
eligibility process for enrollment in a QHP through the Exchange and
for insurance affordability programs. Accordingly, we are finalizing
the language as proposed.
Comment: Several commenters were generally supportive of HHS
specifying that Exchanges determine individuals eligible for an
exemption ``promptly and without undue delay,'' but also raised
concerns about the lack of clear timeliness standards proposed at Sec.
155.605(g). One commenter noted that due to the lack of specificity, an
applicant for an exemption should not be considered uninsured for the
time it takes to evaluate whether he or she is qualified for an
exemption. Other commenters urged HHS to set more clear timeliness
standards. Another commenter suggested that HHS specify that Exchanges
will grant an exemption in real time when all documentation is
available electronically, and where an applicant must submit paper
documentation, suggested specific timeliness standards. A commenter
recommended that HHS more clearly specify the meaning of the ``date of
the application'' in terms of the procedures that Exchanges will use to
log or stamp an application date, and wanted to ensure that the date of
the application would be based on when an individual submitted the
application regardless of when it is received by the Exchange. The
commenter also wanted to make sure an individual receives the
appropriate notice and appeals rights if the Exchange fails to promptly
determine eligibility.
Response: We drafted this provision based on the timeliness
standards for the coverage process and believe that the current
language is appropriate. Accordingly, we are finalizing this provision
as proposed. We are also finalizing proposed paragraph (g)(2), which
specifies that the Exchange will assess the timeliness of eligibility
determinations. As with the coverage process, we intend to work closely
with Exchanges to monitor timeliness and identify opportunities to
improve performance. We note that HHS does not have authority to
determine whether an individual is liable for the shared responsibility
payment, as such authority belongs to the Internal Revenue Service.
Comments addressing the appeals process will be discussed in a future
regulation.
Comment: One commenter noticed a discrepancy between the preamble
associated with Sec. 155.610(h) and the corresponding regulation text,
whereby the preamble mentioned that after December 31 of a given
calendar year, the Exchange will not accept an application for an
exemption except for the exemptions described in Sec. 155.605(c)
(religious conscience) and (g) (hardship), but the regulation text
referenced Sec. 155.605(c) and (f) (membership in an Indian tribe).
Another commenter noted that the preamble language associated with this
provision only allows an individual to receive an exemption
retrospectively through the Exchange until an individual could file an
income tax return, and asked whether HHS intended to limit this to the
regular tax filing due date or to a potentially later date if a
taxpayer applies for an extension or amends a previously filed return.
If HHS intended to limit this to the regular tax filing date, the
commenter asked that HHS modify this provision to clarify that the
Exchange will provide a retrospective exemption for a calendar year up
to the extended filing date or amended filing date for such year,
should a taxpayer request an extension or amend a return.
Response: We believe that it is appropriate to provide exemptions
based on religious conscience and membership in a federally-recognized
Indian tribe retrospectively, without a time limit for filing. We note
that as a result of a drafting oversight, we did not include a
reference to the hardship exemption in the regulation text to specify
that this should also be treated differently than under the general
rule, and we correct this in the final regulation. We also provide for
further special treatment for hardship exemptions; specifically, that
the Exchange will only accept an application for the hardship exemption
under paragraph Sec. 155.605(g)(1) for a month or months during a
calendar year when the application is filed during one of the 3
calendar years after the month or months during which the applicant
attests that the hardship occurred. We believe that the circumstances
of a hardship exemption will motivate an individual to seek such an
exemption in a timely manner, and also recognize the need to balance
the availability of this exemption for an individual who amends his or
her tax return with the administrative burden associated with
processing requests for prior years. We further note that section 6511
of the Code provides the period of limitations on filing a claim for
refund or credit with the IRS. A taxpayer generally must file an
amended tax return by the later of three years from the filing of the
original tax return or two years from the time the tax was paid.
Taxpayers need to file amended returns within these timeframes to
ensure the receipt of a refund of the shared responsibility payment for
a prior year through the IRS, even though the Exchange may
appropriately grant a hardship exemption anytime during the period
specified in Sec. 155.605(g)(1). We maintain the general rule
regarding exemptions for incarcerated individuals and individuals who
are members of a health care sharing ministry, since these will also be
available through the tax filing process, which should facilitate
access to these exemptions in the case of amended returns.
Comment: Based on HHS' proposal to allow individuals to apply for
multiple exemptions, one commenter worried about the potential that
individuals would be confused if receiving multiple notices as a
result. The commenter requested that once an exemption is granted for a
period, HHS specify that the Exchange would not provide a notice
regarding any further exemptions for which an individual applied for
the same time period. The commenter suggested that an individual should
only receive a denial notice for a month or months where he or she does
not already have a certificate of exemption in effect.
Response: We share the commenter's concerns regarding limiting
potential
[[Page 39508]]
confusion for a consumer who applies for multiple exemptions
simultaneously. Accordingly, we clarify that in a situation in which an
individual applies for multiple exemptions, we expect the Exchange will
provide the appropriate notice regarding each exemption for which an
individual applied, as we believe that not providing feedback for all
requested exemptions could create additional confusion for consumers.
We also expect that if an applicant is approved for an exemption, and
then is later denied for a different exemption for the same period of
time, the notice describing the denial will clearly state that the
applicant's prior exemption remains in effect.
Comment: Regarding the proposed recordkeeping provision at Sec.
155.610(j), commenters expressed concern that an individual might think
he or she only needs to retain the exemption certificate, and not
records that demonstrate his or her qualification for the underlying
exemption, and recommended that HHS specify that the Exchange notify
individuals of their obligation to retain the underlying records as
well. Another commenter recommended deleting this paragraph from the
regulation, as they felt the responsibility should rest on the IRS as
opposed to the Exchange.
Response: We agree with the commenters' suggestion to clarify that
the Exchange will notify individuals to retain both the certificate of
exemption as well as records that demonstrate the underlying
qualification for the exemption. We are maintaining this paragraph with
that clarification in the final regulation, since the Exchange is
providing the certificate of exemption and is thus ideally positioned
to notify individuals of this issue.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.610 of the
proposed rule with a few slight modifications: We clarify that the
Exchange must use information collected for purposes of the eligibility
determination for enrollment in a QHP and for insurance affordability
programs in making the exemption eligibility determination to the
extent that the Exchange finds that such information is still
applicable. In Sec. 155.610(d)(3), we specify that until October 15,
2014, the Exchange must, at a minimum, permit an individual to apply
for an exemption via mail, using a paper application. We correct the
oversight in paragraph Sec. 155.610(h) by providing that an applicable
exemption that is available retrospectively and described in Sec.
155.605(g) can also be provided for previous tax years based on an
application that is submitted after December 31 of a given calendar
year, except for Sec. 155.605(g)(1), which may only be provided during
one of the 3 calendar years after the month or months during which the
applicant attests that the hardship occurred. Due to the range of
hardship exemptions available, we redesignate paragraph (h) as
paragraph (h)(1), make a technical correction for clarity in paragraph
(h)(1), and add paragraph (h)(2) to specify that the Exchange will only
accept an application for a hardship exemption specified in Sec.
155.605(g)(1) for a month or months during a calendar year when the
application is filed during one of the 3 calendar years after the month
or months during which the applicant attests that the hardship
occurred. We also modify paragraph (j)(1) to specify that an Exchange
will also notify an individual who is determined eligible for an
exemption to retain the certificate of exemption, and also records
demonstrating his or her qualification for the underlying exemption.
d. Verification Process Related to Eligibility For Exemptions (Sec.
155.615)
In this section, we proposed language regarding the verification
process related to eligibility for exemptions. These processes were
designed not only to minimize the burden on applicants, but also to
serve a valuable program integrity function in order to assure that
applicants are only deemed eligible for exemptions if they meet the
standards specified in Sec. 155.605.
In paragraph (a), we proposed that unless HHS grants a request for
modification under paragraph (i) of this section, the Exchange will
verify or obtain information as provided in this section in order to
determine that the applicant is eligible for an exemption.
In paragraph (b), we proposed the verification process concerning
the exemption for religious conscience. We specified that for any
applicant requesting this exemption, the Exchange will verify that he
or she meets the standards as outlined in Sec. 155.605(c). First, in
paragraph (b)(1), we proposed that except as specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, the Exchange will accept a Form 4029 that
reflects that an applicant has been approved for an exemption from
Social Security and Medicare taxes under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code
by the IRS. Second, in paragraph (b)(2), we proposed that except as
specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) of this section, the Exchange
will accept an applicant's attestation that he or she is a member of a
recognized religious sect or division described in section 1402(g)(1)
of the Code, and an adherent of established tenets or teachings of such
sect or division. Next, the Exchange will verify that the religious
sect or division to which the applicant attests membership is
recognized by SSA as a religious sect or division under section
1402(g)(1) of the Code.
Third, in paragraph (b)(3), we proposed that if the information
provided by an applicant regarding his or her membership in a
recognized religious sect or division is not reasonably compatible with
other information provided by the individual or the records of the
Exchange, the Exchange will follow the procedures specified in
paragraph (g) of this section concerning situations in which the
Exchange is unable to verify information.
Fourth, in paragraph (b)(4), we proposed that if an applicant
attests to membership in a religious sect or division that is not
recognized by SSA as a religious sect or division under section
1402(g)(1) of the Code, the Exchange must provide the applicant with
information regarding how his or her religious sect or division can
pursue recognition under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, and determine
the applicant ineligible for this exemption until such time as the
Exchange obtains information indicating that the religious sect or
division has been approved.
In paragraph (c), we proposed the verification process concerning
the exemption for membership in a health care sharing ministry. We
specified that for any applicant requesting this exemption, the
Exchange will verify whether he or she meets the standards in Sec.
155.605(d). First, in paragraph (c)(1), we proposed that except as
specified in paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this section, the Exchange
will first accept an attestation from an applicant that he or she is a
member of a health care sharing ministry. Next, we proposed that the
Exchange will verify that the health care sharing ministry to which the
applicant attests membership is known to the Exchange as a health care
sharing ministry, based on a list that would be developed by HHS based
on outreach to heath care sharing ministries, which HHS would then make
available to Exchanges.
In paragraph (c)(2), we proposed that if the information provided
by an applicant regarding his or her membership in a health care
sharing ministry is not reasonably compatible with other information
provided by the individual or the records of the Exchange, the Exchange
will follow the procedures specified in paragraph (g) of
[[Page 39509]]
this section concerning situations in which the Exchange is unable to
verify information.
In paragraph (c)(3), we proposed that if an applicant attests to
membership in a health care sharing ministry that is unknown to the
Exchange as a health care sharing ministry according to the standards
in Sec. 155.605(d), the Exchange will then notify HHS and not
determine an applicant eligible or ineligible for this exemption until
HHS informs the Exchange regarding the attested health care sharing
ministry's status with respect to the standards specified in 26 CFR
1.5000A-3(b) of the Treasury proposed rule.
In paragraph (d), we proposed the verification process concerning
the exemption for incarceration. We specified that for any applicant
requesting this exemption, the Exchange will verify, through the
process described in 45 CFR 155.315(e), that he or she was
incarcerated. In paragraph (d)(2), we proposed that if the Exchange is
unable to verify an applicant's incarceration status through the
verification process outlined, the Exchange will follow the procedures
in paragraph (g) of this section concerning situations in which the
Exchange is unable to verify information.
In paragraph (e), we proposed the verification process concerning
the exemption for members of Indian tribes. We specified in paragraph
(e)(1) that for any applicant requesting this exemption, the Exchange
will verify his or her membership in an Indian tribe through the
process outlined in 45 CFR 155.350(c). In paragraph (e)(2), we also
proposed that the Exchange follow the procedures specified in paragraph
(g) of this section if it is unable to verify an applicant's tribal
membership.
In paragraph (f), we proposed the verification process concerning
exemptions for hardship. In paragraph (f)(2), we proposed that for an
applicant applying for a hardship exemption prospectively based on an
inability to afford coverage, as described in Sec. 155.605(g)(2), the
Exchange use procedures established under subpart D of this part to
verify the availability of affordable coverage through the Exchange
based on projected income and eligibility for advance payments of the
premium tax credit, as specified in subpart D of this part, which
involves verifying several attestations by the applicant, including an
attestation related to citizenship, as well as the procedures described
in Sec. 155.320(e) to verify eligibility for qualifying coverage in an
eligible employer-sponsored plan. We solicited comments regarding
appropriate verification procedures for other categories of hardship
that will ensure a high degree of program integrity while minimizing
administrative burden.
In paragraph (g), we proposed procedures for the Exchange to follow
in the event the Exchange is unable to verify information necessary to
make an eligibility determination for an exemption, including
situations in which an applicant's attestation is not reasonably
compatible with information in electronic data sources or other
information in the records of the Exchange, or when electronic data are
required but unavailable. These procedures mirror those provided in
Sec. 155.315(f), with modifications to preclude eligibility pending
the outcome of the verification process, made in accordance with the
Secretary's authority under section 1411 of the Affordable Care Act.
First, under paragraph (g)(1), we proposed that the Exchange will
make a reasonable effort to identify and address the causes of the
issue, including through typographical or other clerical errors, by
contacting the application filer to confirm the accuracy of the
information submitted by the application filer. Second, in paragraph
(g)(2)(i), we proposed that if the Exchange is unable to resolve the
issue, the Exchange will notify the applicant of the issue. After
providing this notice, in paragraph (g)(2)(ii), we proposed that the
Exchange will provide 30 days from the date on which the notice is sent
for the applicant to present satisfactory documentary evidence via the
channels available for the submission of an application, except by
telephone, or otherwise resolve the issues. In paragraph (g)(3), we
proposed that the Exchange may extend the period for an applicant to
resolve the issue if the applicant can provide evidence that a good
faith effort has been made to obtain the necessary documentation. And
in paragraph (g)(4), we proposed that the Exchange will not grant a
certificate of exemption during this period based on the information
that is the subject of the request under this paragraph.
In paragraph (g)(5), we proposed that, if after the conclusion of
the period described in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section, the
Exchange is unable to verify the applicant's attestation, the Exchange
will determine the applicant's eligibility based on the information
available from the data sources specified in this subpart, as
applicable, unless such applicant qualifies for the exception provided
under paragraph (h) of this section, and notify the applicant in
accordance with the procedures described under Sec. 155.610(i),
including the inability to verify the applicant's attestation.
In paragraph (h), we proposed a provision under which the Exchange
would provide a case-by-case exception for applicants for whom
documentation does not exist or is not reasonably available to account
for situations in which documentation cannot be obtained.
In paragraph (i), we proposed that HHS have the flexibility to
approve an Exchange Blueprint or a significant change to an Exchange
Blueprint to modify the methods for the collection and verification of
information as described in this subpart, as well as the specific
information to be collected, based on a finding by HHS that the
requested modification would reduce the administrative costs and
burdens on individuals while maintaining accuracy and minimizing delay,
and that any applicable requirements under 45 CFR 155.260, 45 CFR
155.270, paragraph (j) of this section, and section 6103 of the Code
with respect to the confidentiality, disclosure, maintenance, or use of
information will be met.
In paragraph (j), we proposed that the Exchange will not require an
applicant to provide information beyond what is necessary to support
the process of the Exchange for eligibility determinations for
exemptions, including the process for resolving inconsistencies
described in paragraph (g) of this section.
Comment: One commenter raised broad concerns about potential
challenges for consumers regarding verification, and requested that HHS
specify a 1-year transition period during which the Exchange would rely
primarily on self-attestation, using a form signed under penalty of
perjury, or auditing a portion of applications submitted by
individuals.
Response: We share the commenter's desire for a good consumer
experience for those individuals who are seeking an exemption. However,
we believe that statutory and program integrity concerns argue in favor
of the Exchange applying a more comprehensive verification process than
self-attestation. We expect to learn from the initial months and years
of operations, and to work with states to achieve continuous
improvement, with a particular focus on the consumer experience.
Comment: One commenter recommended that a taxpayer who already has
an approved IRS Form 4029 should not have to request an exemption
through the Exchange, and instead should be able to write ``Exempt Form
4029'' on his or her tax return.
[[Page 39510]]
Response: We strive to establish an Exchange exemption process that
minimizes the burden on individuals to the extent possible. We note
that section 5000A(d)(2) of the Code specifies that the religious
conscience exemption is available only through the Exchange. However,
we note that we are finalizing proposed Sec. 155.615(b)(1), which
specifies that the verification process for this exemption will include
the Exchange accepting an approved IRS Form 4029 for any individual who
has one.
Comment: One commenter recommended that in situations in which the
health care sharing ministry to which an individual attests membership
is not included on the list provided to the Exchange by HHS, HHS should
issue the eligibility determination notice denying the exemption as
opposed to the Exchange.
Response: If an Exchange accepts the original exemption application
from an individual, we continue to believe that it is appropriate for
the Exchange to issue the corresponding eligibility determination
notice in order to prevent confusion that individuals may experience if
receiving a separate notice from HHS. We note that nothing precludes an
Exchange from notifying such an individual that the determination is
based on a list provided by HHS.
Comment: One commenter requested further specificity about the
process and standards HHS will use in developing the list of health
care sharing ministries that meet the standards specified in the
statute.
Response: We recognize the importance of providing a clear process
for establishing the list of health care sharing ministries that meet
the statutory standards. Accordingly, we are renumbering proposed Sec.
155.615(c) as Sec. 155.615(c)(1)(i) through (iii), and adding Sec.
155.615(c)(2) to specify a process that is substantially similar to the
approach discussed in Sec. 155.604(c) regarding how HHS will determine
that certain types of coverage meet the substantive and procedural
requirements for consideration as minimum essential coverage.
Specifically, we note that to be considered a health care sharing
ministry for the purposes of this subpart, an organization will submit
information to HHS that substantiates the organization's compliance
with the standards specified in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
We also note that if at any time HHS determines that an organization
previously considered a health care sharing ministry for the purposes
of this subpart no longer meets the standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code, HHS may revoke its earlier decision.
This revocation refers to the status of the health care sharing
ministry, and not to the status of an individual's exemption related to
membership in a health care sharing ministry. As such, while the
Exchange would not grant an exemption to an individual attesting
membership in such a health care sharing ministry after revoking its
status, the Exchange would not revoke a prior exemption granted to an
individual based on the status of a health care sharing ministry. We
discuss this information collection in the Information Collection
Requirements section of this final rule.
We also clarify in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) that if an applicant
attests to membership in a health care sharing ministry that is not
known to the Exchange as a health care sharing ministry based on
information provided by HHS, the Exchange must provide the applicant
with information regarding how an organization can pursue recognition
under Sec. 155.615(c)(2), and determine the applicant ineligible for
this exemption until such time as HHS notifies the Exchange that the
health care sharing ministry's meets the standards specified in section
5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code. We note that individual members cannot
seek recognition under Sec. 155.615(c)(2) on behalf of their health
care sharing ministry, as HHS will only review information submitted by
the health care sharing ministry itself.
Comment: One commenter urged HHS to remove the reference to
reasonable compatibility as part of verifying membership in a health
care sharing ministry, or to clarify that an individual could still
receive an exemption based on membership in a health care sharing
ministry if he or she had been enrolled in health insurance in the past
or was currently enrolled in health insurance.
Response: In response to the commenter, we will clarify that the
Exchange will not consider an individual's current or previous health
coverage as reasonably incompatible with membership in a health care
sharing ministry, since nothing in the statute limits the availability
of such an exemption to an individual who was or is uninsured.
Comment: One commenter suggested that for purposes of the
Federally-Facilitated Exchange, HHS work with local tribes and the
Bureau of Indian Affairs to contract for the verification of membership
in an Indian tribe.
Response: We appreciate this comment, and are committed to creating
an efficient eligibility process for all applicants. In proposed Sec.
155.615(e), we specified that the Exchange would use the same
verification process that is used for the verification of Indian status
for purposes of special cost-sharing provisions and special enrollment
periods for enrollment in a QHP through the Exchange. The cross-
referenced section allows an Exchange to rely on any electronic data
sources that have been approved by HHS for this purpose, including
electronic data acquired from tribes. Based on the short timeline for
implementation, for October 1, 2013, the Federally-facilitated Exchange
will be unable to collect data from individual tribes, and so will rely
on a paper documentation process. State-based Exchanges may have
additional opportunities for October 1, 2013.
Comment: One commenter recommended that HHS should specify that an
individual renew an exemption based on membership in an Indian tribe on
an annual basis. Other commenters urged HHS to use electronic data
matching with the Indian Health Service (IHS) as one tool to verify
membership in an Indian tribe as well as the suggested hardship
exemptions discussed above. Commenters asked HHS to specify that the
Exchange first consult all available electronic data sources; second,
if electronic data sources do not support an applicant's attestation,
seek paper documentation; and third, and if individuals lack the
appropriate documentation, call the listed tribe's Contract Health
Services Officer or tribal enrollment office.
Response: We modeled the verification process for the exemption
based on an individual's membership in an Indian tribe on the
verification process that will be used for individuals seeking coverage
at 45 CFR 155.350(c). We appreciate the suggestions from commenters, as
they generally follow our approach in 45 CFR 155.350(c). Specifically,
in 45 CFR 155.350(c), we specify that the Exchange will first use any
approved electronic data sources, and only request paper documentation
when electronic data sources are unavailable or do not support an
applicant's attestation. 45 CFR 155.350(c) does not specify that the
Exchange will contact a tribe's Contract Health Services Officer or
tribal enrollment office when documentation is unavailable. Rather, in
Sec. 155.615(h), we proposed that when documentation does not exist or
is not reasonably available, the Exchange will provide an exception on
a case-by-case basis and accept an applicant's attestation. We also
note that Exchanges have flexibility to work with local tribes to gain
[[Page 39511]]
information that could be used on an electronic basis.
Comment: One commenter worried that the proposed verifications
process placed too much burden on individuals as opposed to the
Exchange, and urged HHS to shift this burden in the future.
Response: We have attempted to limit burden on individuals as much
as possible in the proposed and final regulations. We intend to work
with all relevant stakeholders in the future to identify opportunities
to increase the efficiency and integrity of the verification process.
Comment: Commenters expressed concerns regarding proposed Sec.
155.615(g) and situations where the Exchange is unable to verify the
necessary information to determine eligibility for an exemption. Some
commenters requested greater clarification to limit any possible
confusion about when attestations should be accepted, when attestations
must be verified, when documents must be provided, and what type of
documents would be sufficient. Additionally commenters expressed
concerns about the 30-day time period for individuals to present
satisfactory documentary evidence to the Exchange in order to resolve
an inconsistency, and urged extending this time period, or providing
flexibility for the Exchange to ensure that individuals have a
``reasonable opportunity'' to submit documentation.
Response: In response to comments, we will modify proposed Sec.
155.615(g)(2)(ii) to allow an individual 90 days to present
satisfactory documentary evidence to the Exchange, which is the time
period used in the eligibility process for enrollment in a QHP, advance
payments of the premium tax credit, and cost-sharing reductions. We
will maintain the proposed language specifying that an individual is
not eligible for an exemption during this time period. As the language
from paragraph (g) is modeled after the inconsistency process from
Sec. 155.315(f), we believe that this provision already describes the
process concerning an Exchange's inability to verify necessary
information with sufficient clarity to limit confusion. The notices
that the Exchange provides to an individual for whom the Exchange is
unable to verify necessary information will specify the documentation
that such an individual can submit to resolve an inconsistency.
Comment: Multiple commenters expressed support for our proposal at
Sec. 155.615(h) to provide an exception on a case-by-case basis for
individuals who lack certain documentation, although some sought
further clarification to prevent confusion. One commenter suggested
that paragraph (h) of this section should extend not only to
circumstances when the Exchange has information that is inconsistent
with an individual's attestation but also to circumstances when the
attestation itself cannot be verified through other data sources.
Response: As this exception for special circumstances mirrors
similar language used in regards to the coverage process at Sec.
155.315(g), we maintain the language as proposed. We clarify that this
provision is designed to address any situation in which documentation
is needed, but does not exist or is not reasonably available.
Comment: One commenter expressed support for Sec. 155.615(j),
which limits the collection of application information to the minimum
amount necessary, while also recommending that HHS amend this provision
to ensure alignment with section 1411(g) of the Affordable Care Act.
Response: We affirm that the Exchange should collect only the
minimum information necessary to support the eligibility process for
exemptions. The proposed language mirrors that used in 45 CFR
155.315(i), which is designed to implement section 1411(g)(1) of the
Affordable Care Act. We also note that the overarching privacy and
security protections specified in 45 CFR 155.260 apply to the
exemptions process. Together, we believe that these sections already
appropriately address the commenter's concerns regarding information
collection and privacy.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.615 of the
proposed rule with several modifications, as follows. First, we make a
technical correction in paragraph (b)(1) to specify that the Exchange
must accept a form that reflects he or she is exempt from Social
Security and Medicare taxes under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code.
Second, we clarify that if an applicant attests to membership in a
religious sect or division that is not recognized by the SSA as an
approved religious sect or division under section 1402(g)(1) of the
Code, the Exchange will provide the applicant with information
regarding how his or her religious sect or division can pursue
recognition under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, and determine the
applicant ineligible for this exemption until such time as the Exchange
obtains information indicating that the religious sect or division has
been approved. Third, we renumber proposed Sec. 155.615(c), move the
language from previous paragraph (c)(1) into paragraph (c),
redesignating paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) as paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and
(ii), and add Sec. 155.615(c)(2) to specify a process for establishing
the list of health care sharing ministries that meet the statutory
standards that is substantially similar to the approach discussed in
Sec. 155.604(c) regarding how HHS will determine that certain types of
coverage meet the substantive and procedural requirements for
consideration as minimum essential coverage. We also specify in
paragraph (c)(1)(i) that the Exchange may not consider an applicant's
prior or current enrollment in health coverage as not reasonably
compatible with an applicant's attestation of membership in a health
care sharing ministry, and we specify in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) that if
an applicant attests to membership in a health care sharing ministry
that is not known to the Exchange as a health care sharing ministry
based on information provided by HHS, the Exchange will provide the
applicant with information regarding how an organization can pursue
recognition under Sec. 155.615(c)(2), and determine the applicant
ineligible for this exemption until such time as HHS notifies the
Exchange that the health care sharing ministry's meets the standards
specified in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
We specify in paragraph (f)(1) that the Exchange will not verify
whether an applicant experienced a hardship under Sec. 155.605(g)(3)
or (5); rather, these exemptions will be claimed directly with the IRS
at tax filing. We redesignate paragraph (f)(2) as paragraph (f)(2)(i),
make a technical correction in redesignated paragraph (f)(2)(i) to
clarify that the procedures used to determine eligibility for advance
payments of the premium tax credit in subpart D include Sec.
155.315(c)(1). We note that at 78 FR 4638, we proposed to consolidate
Sec. 155.320(d) and (e) into Sec. 155.320(d). To the extent that we
finalize this redesignation, we intend to make a simultaneous technical
correction to this cross-reference. We add new paragraph (f)(2)(ii) to
clarify that in determining eligibility for the lack of affordable
coverage based on projected income hardship exemption, the Exchange
will accept an application filer's attestation for an applicant
regarding eligibility for minimum essential coverage other than through
an eligible employer-sponsored plan. We redesignate paragraph (f)(3) as
paragraph (f)(4), and add new paragraph (f)(3) to specify that the
Exchange will use the same verification procedures for
[[Page 39512]]
the exemption for an individual who is eligible for services through an
Indian health care provider as it will use for the exemption for
members of a federally-recognized tribe.
In 78 FR 4636, we proposed to modify Sec. 155.315(f) to specify
that the Exchange would trigger an inconsistency when electronic data
is required but not reasonably expected to be available within 2 days.
To ensure alignment across the eligibility process for enrollment in a
QHP through the Exchange and insurance affordability programs with the
eligibility process for exemptions, we make a technical correction to
specify that the Exchange will trigger the process under Sec.
155.615(g) when electronic data is required but not reasonably expected
to be available within the time period specified as Sec. 155.315(f).
We modify Sec. 155.615(g)(2)(ii) to allow an applicant 90 days to
present satisfactory documentary evidence to resolve an inconsistency.
Lastly, we add paragraph (k) to mirror the Exchange's requirement
regarding the validation of a Social Security number for an individual
applying for an exemption from the shared responsibility payment with
the same validation process for purposes of individual seeking coverage
as described in Sec. 155.315(b).
e. Eligibility Redeterminations for Exemptions During a Calendar Year
(Sec. 155.620)
In Sec. 155.620, we proposed in paragraph (a) to implement section
1411(f) of the Affordable Care Act by providing that the Exchange will
redetermine an individual's eligibility for an exemption if the
Exchange receives and verifies new information as reported by an
individual. In paragraph (b)(1), we proposed that the Exchange will
require an individual with a certificate of exemption to report any
changes related to the eligibility standards described in Sec.
155.605. We solicited comments as to whether we should provide
flexibility such that the Exchange may establish a reasonable threshold
for changes in income, such that an individual who experiences a change
in income that is below the threshold is not required to report such
change.
In paragraph (b)(2), we proposed that the Exchange would allow an
individual to report changes through the channels acceptable for the
submission of an exemption application.
In paragraph (c), we proposed that the Exchange use the
verification processes used at the point of initial application, as
described in Sec. 155.615, in order to verify any changes reported by
an individual prior to using the self-reported information in an
eligibility determination for an exemption. In paragraph (c)(2), we
proposed that the Exchange notify an individual in accordance with
Sec. 155.610(i) after re-determining his or her eligibility based on a
reported change. Lastly, in paragraph (c)(3), we proposed that the
Exchange provide periodic electronic notifications regarding the
requirements for reporting changes and an individual's opportunity to
report any changes, to an individual who has a certificate of exemption
and who has elected to receive electronic notifications, unless he or
she has declined to receive such notifications. We noted that unlike
Sec. 155.330, we did not propose that the Exchange conduct periodic
data matching regarding an individual's eligibility for an exemption.
We solicited comments as to whether we should establish similar data
matching provisions, and if so, whether we should specify that the
Exchange should handle changes identified through the matching process
in a similar manner as to that specified in Sec. 155.330, or take a
different approach.
Also unlike the eligibility process for enrollment in a QHP and for
insurance affordability programs, we did not propose an annual Exchange
redetermination process for exemptions. We solicited comments regarding
how the Exchange could expedite and streamline the process for
individuals with a certificate of exemption that is not approved
indefinitely who wish to maintain the exemption for a subsequent year.
Comment: One commenter stated that individuals should not have to
report changes in religious status or their status as a member of an
Indian tribe, but rather the religious sect or tribe should report such
a change in status to the Exchange or HHS in order to prevent fraud.
Response: We share the commenter's program integrity concerns, but
continue to believe that the responsibility to report changes remains
appropriately on the individual who has received an exemption. As
Exchanges start to grant exemptions, we will work with states to
monitor the process and determine whether changes would be appropriate.
Comment: One commenter sought clarification as to whether
redeterminations only occur when an individual reports a change or
whether the Exchange has the authority to cancel an exemption it
previously granted on its own.
Response: We clarify that redeterminations under this section can
only occur when an individual reports a change that impacts his or her
eligibility determination for an exemption.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concerns regarding the burden
involved in requiring an individual to report changes that would impact
his or her eligibility for an exemption. One commenter inquired about
how HHS would enforce the regulatory reporting requirements.
Response: The proposed approach is identical to the approach taken
in Sec. 155.330(b), and we believe that it is generally appropriate
for eligibility for enrollment in a QHP through the Exchange, advance
payments of the premium tax credit, cost-sharing reductions, and
exemptions. With that said, as noted above, we have modified the
eligibility standards, in order to reduce administrative burden, for
the hardship exemption specified in Sec. 155.605(g)(2), which covers
situations in which an individual lacks affordable coverage based on
projected household income, such that the Exchange will provide this
exemption for all remaining months in a coverage year, notwithstanding
any change in an individual's circumstances. Accordingly, we modify
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)(3) to conform to this change by clarifying
that the Exchange will not conduct mid-year redeterminations for this
exemption, will not require individuals receiving this exemption to
report changes, and will not send periodic reminders to report changes
to individuals who have this exemption. As Exchanges start to grant
exemptions, we will work with states to monitor the process and
determine whether other changes would be appropriate.
Comment: Commenters raised concerns about requiring individuals to
report changes, and suggested that if HHS maintains these requirements,
they should provide a special enrollment period for an individual who
loses their exemption in the middle of a calendar year as a result of a
redetermination and who has no opportunity to enroll in coverage, which
would leave them potentially liable for the shared responsibility
payment.
Response: We do not want to create an incentive for an individual
who has an exemption to not report changes in their eligibility. We
also do not want to create a situation in which an individual who has
followed procedures and wants to enroll in health coverage is instead
liable for the shared responsibility payment. We are adding paragraph
(d) to clarify that the Exchange will implement a change resulting from
a redetermination under
[[Page 39513]]
this section for the month or months after the month in which the
redetermination occurs such that a certificate that was provided for
the month in which the redetermination occurs, and for prior months,
remains effective. We address the ability of an individual who loses
eligibility for an exemption following a redetermination to enroll in a
QHP in the guidance published simultaneously with this final
regulation.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Exchange provide periodic
electronic notifications regarding reporting changes to individuals
only if they decide to receive such notifications as opposed to
providing individuals periodic electronic notifications regarding
reporting changes unless they affirmatively decline to receive such
notifications.
Response: As we proposed this provision to mirror a similar
provision concerning the coverage process at Sec. 155.330(c)(2), we
maintain the provision as proposed, with the modification discussed
above to eliminate this notification for individuals who have the
exemption specified in Sec. 155.605(g)(2).
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.620 of the
proposed rule with a few slight modifications. We clarify in paragraph
(a) that the Exchange only must redetermine the eligibility of an
individual with an exemption granted by the Exchange, and that it will
not conduct redeterminations for the exemption described in Sec.
155.605(g)(2). In paragraph (b), we specify that the Exchange will not
require an individual who has an exemption under Sec. 155.605(g)(2) to
report changes with respect to his or her eligibility for this
exemption; accordingly, in paragraph (c)(3), we clarify that the
Exchange will not provide periodic reminders to report changes to this
group of individuals. We also add paragraph (d) to specify that the
Exchange will implement a change resulting from a redetermination under
this section for the month or months after the month in which the
redetermination occurs, such that a certificate that was provided for
the month in which the redetermination occurs, and for prior months,
remains effective.
f. Options for Conducting Eligibility Determinations for Exemptions
(Sec. 155.625)
In Sec. 155.625, we proposed that a state-based Exchange can
satisfy the requirements of subpart G if it uses a federally-managed
service to make eligibility determinations for exemptions, and we
solicited comments regarding the specific configuration of a service
that would be useful for states and also feasible within the time
remaining for implementation.
First, in paragraph (a), we proposed that the Exchange may satisfy
the requirements of this subpart by either executing all eligibility
functions, directly or through contracting arrangements described in 45
CFR 155.110(a), or through the use of a federally-managed service
described in paragraph (b) of Sec. 155.625.
Second, in paragraph (b), we proposed that the Exchange may
implement an eligibility determination for an exemption made by HHS,
provided that the Exchange accepts the application, as specified in
Sec. 155.610(d), and issues the eligibility notice, as specified in
Sec. 155.610(i), and that verifications and other activities required
in connection with eligibility determinations for exemptions are
performed by the Exchange in accordance with the standards identified
in this subpart or by HHS in accordance with the agreement described in
paragraph (b)(4) of this section. We also proposed that under this
option, the Exchange will transmit all applicant information and other
information obtained by the Exchange to HHS, and adhere to HHS'
determination. Lastly, in paragraph (b)(4), we proposed that the
Exchange and HHS enter into an agreement specifying their respective
responsibilities in connection with eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
In paragraph (c), we proposed the standards to which the Exchange
will adhere when eligibility determinations are made in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this section. Such standards included that the
arrangement does not increase administrative costs and burdens on
individuals, or increase delay, and that applicable requirements under
Sec. 155.260, Sec. 155.270, and Sec. 155.315(i), and section 6103 of
the Code are met with respect to the confidentiality, disclosure,
maintenance or use of information.
Comment: Commenters expressed general support for the proposals in
Sec. 155.625 in regards to the ability for a state-based Exchange to
satisfy the requirements of this subpart by either executing all
eligibility functions directly, through contracting arrangements, or
through the use of a federally-managed service described in paragraph
(b). Commenters urged HHS to further help reduce the burden on
Exchanges developing the operational capacity needed to conduct
eligibility determinations for exemptions. Another commenter wanted to
clarify that an Exchange relying on HHS to make an eligibility
determination for an exemption could also rely on HHS to administer the
exemptions appeals process.
Response: In response to comments seeking to limit the burden on
Exchanges, and based on the operational capacity of the Exchange and
HHS being able to comply with the statutory requirements to accept
exemptions applications and issue eligibility determination notices for
the first year of operations, we are modifying the proposed language
regarding how the Exchange may rely on the use of an HHS service.
We specify that for an application submitted prior to October 15,
2014, the Exchange may rely on HHS to process exemptions applications,
complete the necessary verifications, determine eligibility, and issue
notices, including any certificates of exemption. Exchanges will still
assist individuals seeking a lack of affordable coverage based on
projected income hardship exemption by providing an individual with the
resulting cost of his or her lowest-cost bronze plan that incorporates
any advance payments of the premium tax credit allowable under section
36B of the Code. Additionally, the Exchange call center and Internet
Web site as specified in 45 CFR 155.205(a) and (b) respectively, must
be responsible for providing information to consumers regarding the
exemption eligibility process.
For an application submitted on or after October 15, 2014, the
Exchange may adopt an exemption eligibility determination made by HHS
provided that the Exchange accepts the application and issues the
eligibility notice in the same manner as discussed in the proposed
rule. As a result of clarifying the flexibility for Exchanges prior to
October 15, 2014, we accordingly remove paragraph (c).
We also note that comments regarding the appeals process for
exemptions will be addressed in a future regulation. We expect that
future rulemaking will clarify that if an Exchange relies on HHS to
make an eligibility determination for an exemption, the Exchange may
also rely on HHS to administer the exemptions appeals process as well,
provided that any underlying decisions made by the Exchange are
addressed through the appropriate Exchange appeals process.
[[Page 39514]]
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are modifying the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.625 to
eliminate proposed paragraph (c). We redesignate paragraphs (b)(1)
through (b)(5) as (b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(v) to clarify that the
standards discussed therein apply to an Exchange seeking to rely on an
exemption eligibility determination made by HHS on or after October 15,
2014. We add (b)(1) to reflect that HHS will administer the entire
eligibility process for exemptions for Exchanges that decide to rely on
HHS to conduct eligibility determinations for an application submitted
before October 15, 2014, provided that the Exchange adheres to the
eligibility determination made by HHS furnishes any information
available through the Exchange that is necessary for an applicant to
utilize the process administered by HHS, and the Exchange call center
and Internet Web site provide information to assist consumers regarding
the exemption eligibility process.
g. Reporting (Sec. 155.630)
In Sec. 155.630, we proposed to codify the provisions specified in
section 1311(d)(4)(I)(i) of the Affordable Care Act regarding reporting
by the Exchange to IRS regarding eligibility determinations for
exemptions. If the Exchange grants an individual a certificate of
exemption in accordance with Sec. 155.610(i), we proposed that the
Exchange will transmit to IRS the individual's name and SSN, exemption
certificate number, and any additional information specified in
additional guidance published by IRS in accordance with 26 CFR
601.601(d)(2). We solicited comments as to how this interaction could
work as smoothly as possible.
Comment: One commenter raised concerns about the lack of an IRS
interface to report exemptions, and wanted HHS to ensure that Exchanges
will be provided sufficient time to implement such an interface.
Response: We recognize the commenter's concerns regarding the
reporting process for exemptions. HHS continues to work closely with
the IRS to ensure an efficient interface to report exemptions, and
anticipates releasing technical guidance on this shortly. We also
anticipate that this reporting will be accomplished through a monthly
file, which will be sent to IRS for the first time in February, 2014,
and will also incorporate information regarding enrollment in a QHP
through the Exchange and advance payments of the premium tax credit,
based on other provisions.
Comment: One commenter recommended that HHS provide Exchanges
flexibility to obtain and report taxpayer identification numbers, if
relevant, rather than only SSNs as proposed. The commenter also wanted
to ensure that this provision explicitly specifies that Exchanges will
comply with existing confidentiality protections for individual tax
information under the Affordable Care Act and section 6103 of the Code.
Response: We maintain the language of the proposed regulation. We
also note that in response to this comment, in order to limit the
administrative burden on Exchanges associated with reporting to IRS, we
have clarified in Sec. 155.615(k) that similar to the coverage
process, the Exchange will validate application SSNs that are included
on an exemptions application. Similar to eligibility for enrollment in
a QHP, having a SSN is not a requirement to receiving an exemption, and
as such the inability to validate a SSN will not preclude an
eligibility determination for an exemption. However, the successful
validation of a SSN will help in the efficient administration of the
tax filing process. Furthermore, we note that 45 CFR 155.260 specifies
that tax information will be protected in accordance with section 6103
of the Code.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.630 of the
proposed rule without modification.
h. Right To Appeal (Sec. 155.635)
In Sec. 155.635, we proposed that the Exchange will include notice
of the right to appeal and instructions for how to appeal in any
notification issued in accordance with Sec. 155.610(i) and Sec.
155.625(b)(1). We proposed that an individual may appeal any
eligibility determination or redetermination made by the Exchange in
relation to an exemption. Additional detail about the appeal process is
described in subpart F of the proposed rule titled, ``Medicaid,
Children's Health Insurance Programs, and Exchanges: Essential Health
Benefits in Alternative Benefit Plans, Eligibility Notices, Fair
Hearing and Appeal Processes for Medicaid and Exchange Eligibility
Appeals and Other Provisions Related to Eligibility and Enrollment for
Exchanges, Medicaid and CHIP, and Medicaid Premiums and Cost Sharing''
(78 FR 4719).
Comment: One commenter expressed concerns about individuals with
access to eligible employer-sponsored coverage that would prevent an
individual from receiving advance payments of the premium tax credit,
while still leaving them subject to the shared responsibility payment.
The commenter wanted the Exchange to have discretion through the
appeals process to consider the totality of an applicant's
circumstances. Another commenter urged HHS to specify that translation
services are available for LEP individuals to ensure they have
appropriate access to the appeals process, including the content of
notices and requests for hearings.
Response: Comments concerning the appeals process for exemptions
will be addressed in future rulemaking.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We are finalizing the provisions proposed in Sec. 155.635 of the
proposed rule with three modifications. First, we are deleting the
reference to Sec. 155.625(b)(1), as we are modifying proposed Sec.
155.625 to specify that an Exchange that relies on HHS to make
eligibility determinations for exemptions will not issue the
eligibility notice. Second, we also make a technical correction in
paragraph (b) to replace the reference to the Commissioner of the IRS
with the Secretary of the Treasury. Third, we make a technical
correction to remove the introductory text, which is not substantive.
B. Part 156--Health Insurance Issuer Standards Under the Affordable
Care Act, Including Standards Related to Exchanges
a. Definition of Minimum Essential Coverage (Sec. 156.600)
The proposed rule cross referenced the Treasury regulation under
section 5000A of the Code for the definition of minimum essential
coverage.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We made minor changes to the provisions of Sec. 156.600 to clarify
the meaning of the final rule.
b. Other Types of Coverage That Qualify as Minimum Essential Coverage
(Sec. 156.602)
The proposed rule specifically designated the following types of
coverage as minimum essential coverage for purposes of the Code: Self-
funded student health insurance plans; foreign health coverage; Refugee
Medical Assistance supported by the Administration for Children and
Families (45 CFR Part 400 Subpart G); Medicare advantage plans;
AmeriCorps coverage (45 CFR 2522.10 through 2522.950), and state high
risk pools (as defined in Sec. 2744 of the Public Health Service Act
(PHS Act)). We solicited comments on these types of coverage
[[Page 39515]]
and whether there are other existing categories of coverage that should
be recognized as minimum essential coverage. We also solicited comments
regarding whether self-funded student health coverage should be limited
to institutions of higher education, as defined by the Higher Education
Act of 1965, or if coverage offered by other institutions, such as
primary or secondary educational institution, or unaccredited
educational institutions, should be included. Lastly, we solicited
comments on the inclusion of AmeriCorps coverage in the designated
list.
Under the proposed rule, state high risk pools were designated as
minimum essential coverage for a period of time to be determined by the
Secretary. We reserved the right to review and monitor the extent and
quality of coverage, and in the future to reassess whether they should
be designated minimum essential coverage or should be required to go
through the process outlined in Sec. 156.604 of this proposed rule. We
solicited comments on whether state high risk pools should
automatically be designated as minimum essential coverage or whether
they should be required to follow the process outlined in Sec. 156.604
of this proposed rule.
The comments and our responses are set forth below.
Comment: Many commenters were concerned that the unregulated status
of self-funded student health coverage may leave students unable to
benefit from the protections of the Affordable Care Act, and that
students who are offered a self-funded plan through their college or
university may find it difficult or impossible to obtain coverage
through the Exchanges and to access the Affordable Care Act premium and
cost-sharing subsidies. These commenters conceded that some self-funded
student health coverage is good coverage, but other plans do not
provide adequate coverage. These commenters specifically cited annual
and lifetime limits, prescription drug limits, pre-existing condition
exclusions and rescissions as reasons that some self-funded student
health coverage is not satisfactory coverage for many students. In
contrast, other commenters stated their support for designating self-
funded student health coverage as minimum essential coverage, citing
the ACHA guidelines document, Standards for Student Health Insurance/
Benefits Programs, which will ``encourage provision of benefits in
self-funded plans that are consistent with Affordable Care Act
requirements that have been established for student insured plans.''
Response: After reviewing the comments regarding designating self-
funded student health plans as minimum essential coverage for purposes
of the Code, we agree that because self-funded student health plans can
be varied in the types of benefits being provided, these plans should
not be permanently designated as minimum essential coverage. In this
final rule we designate self-funded student health coverage as minimum
essential coverage for plan or policy years beginning on or before
December 31, 2014. For coverage beginning after December 31, 2014,
sponsors of self-funded student health plans may apply to be recognized
as minimum essential coverage through the process outlined in Sec.
156.604 of the final rule. In addition, the Department of the Treasury
intends to publish guidance under section 36B of the Code about whether
individuals who are eligible to enroll in self-funded student health
plans will be treated as eligible for qualified health plan coverage
subsidized by the premium tax credit.
In the proposed rule we designated state high risk pools as minimum
essential coverage for a transition period and solicited comments on
whether state high risk pools should be recognized as minimum essential
coverage. We did not receive any comments on state high risk pools and
we are finalizing the proposed rule. To be consistent with the
treatment of self-funded student health plans which under the final
rule are designated as minimum essential coverage for plan or policy
years beginning on or before December 31, 2014, we are applying the
same one-year transitional period to state high risk pools. For
coverage beginning after December 31, 2014, sponsors of state high risk
pools may apply to be recognized as minimum essential coverage through
the process outlined in Sec. 156.604 of the final rule. In addition,
the Department of the Treasury intends to publish guidance under
section 36B of the Code about whether individuals who are eligible to
enroll in state high risk pools will be treated as eligible for
qualified health plan coverage subsidized by the premium tax credit.
Comment: Some commenters supported the designation of foreign
health coverage as minimum essential coverage because foreign health
coverage provides meaningful health care benefits to, legally admitted,
non-citizens temporarily working in the United States. Other commenters
expressed concern that foreign health coverage, which is generally
provided to non-citizens by a foreign home country or through foreign
commercial health coverage, provides limited or no out-of-country
benefits to such persons while legally in the United States.
Response: We agree that the health care benefits provided by
foreign governments or through foreign insurance for legally admitted
non-citizens of the United States vary from country to country and may
create a barrier to care if health care providers in the United States
do not accept payment from such coverage. Therefore, foreign health
coverage is not designated as minimum essential coverage in this final
rule. However, sponsors of foreign health coverage may apply for their
coverage to be recognized as minimum essential coverage in the process
outlined in Sec. 156.604 of this final rule.
Comment: Some commenters supported the designation of coverage
provided by AmeriCorps programs to their AmeriCorps members as minimum
essential coverage. They stated that the lack of an employer/employee
relationship creates difficulties for programs seeking insurance on
their own through traditional group insurance markets. Further,
coverage provided by AmeriCorps programs to their AmeriCorps members
has produced economies of scale and a solution to the accessibility
challenges particular to smaller programs. Commenters also stated that
the demographics and full funding of premiums by the program has led to
stable claims experience.
Other commenters opposed designating the coverage provided by
AmeriCorps programs to AmeriCorps volunteers as minimum essential
coverage because some of the provided benefits fall below the minimal
coverage requirements required by the Affordable Care Act. In addition,
commenters noted that stipends for most volunteers are between 100-200
percent FPL, meaning that they may either qualify for a premium
assistance program or a hardship exemption.
Response: In response to these comments concerning consumer
protections, the final rule does not automatically designate coverage
provided by AmeriCorps programs to AmeriCorps volunteers as minimum
essential coverage. However, AmeriCorps coverage provided to volunteers
may be recognized as minimum essential coverage through the
certification process outlined in Sec. 156.604 of this final rule.
Comment: Several commenters urged HHS to recognize multi-share
plans as minimum essential coverage. These commenters also requested
that if multi-share plans were not designated as
[[Page 39516]]
minimum essential coverage, that they be eligible to apply for
recognition as minimum essential coverage. These commenters described
the unique structure of multi-share plans, stating that these programs
already meet the community needs of affordable health insurance; multi-
share programs often focus on specific geographic areas or populations;
and that multi-share plans are community funded, receive no federal
subsidies and are a demonstrated alternative to traditional health
insurance. Multi-share plans are designed to be coverage of last resort
for low-income small businesses, students and individuals when other
programs are unavailable.
Response: While multi-share plans are not designated as minimum
essential coverage in this final rule, HHS invites all multi-share
organizations to apply for their coverage to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage in the process outlined in Sec. 156.604 of this
final rule.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
As proposed in the proposed rule, in Sec. 156.602 we designate
Medicare Advantage, and Refugee Medical Assistance supported by the
Administration for Children and Families (45 CFR Subpart G), as minimum
essential coverage. We also designate self-funded student health plans
and state high risk pools as minimum essential coverage for plan or
policy years beginning on or before December 31, 2014. For coverage
beginning after December 31, 2014, sponsors of self-funded student
health plans and state high risk pools may apply to be recognized as
minimum essential coverage through the process outlined in Sec.
156.604 of the final rule. Section 156.602 no longer specifically
designates foreign health coverage or coverage provided by AmeriCorps
programs to AmeriCorps volunteers as minimum essential coverage.
However, plans that provide coverage to AmeriCorps volunteers as well
as coverage provided by foreign governments may receive designation as
minimum essential coverage by following the process for recognition
explained in Sec. 156.604.
c. Requirements for Recognition as Minimum Essential Coverage for Types
of Coverage Not Otherwise Designated Minimum Essential Coverage in the
Statute or This Regulation (Sec. 156.604)
The proposed rule outlined a process by which other types of
coverage could seek to be recognized as minimum essential coverage.
Coverage recognized as minimum essential coverage through this process
would need to offer substantially the same consumer protections as
those enumerated in the Title I of Affordable Care Act relating to non-
grandfathered, individual coverage to ensure consumers are receiving
the protections of the Affordable Care Act. We solicited comments on
the proposed ``substantially comply'' standard as it applies to other
types of individual coverage. We also solicited comments on the process
for recognizing other coverage as minimum essential coverage.
In the proposed regulation, sponsors of minimum essential coverage
must also meet other criteria specified by the Secretary. We solicited
comments on the types of criteria the Secretary should consider in this
process as well as whether they should be added to the final rule. We
proposed that sponsors of a plan that seeks to have such coverage
recognized as minimum essential coverage adhere to certain procedures.
Sponsors would submit to HHS electronically the following information:
(1) Name of the organization sponsoring the plan; (2) name and title of
the individual who is authorized to make, and makes, this certification
on behalf of the organization; (3) address of the individual named
above; (4) phone number of the individual named above; (5) number of
enrollees; (6) eligibility criteria; (7) cost sharing requirements,
including deductible and out-of-pocket maximum; (8) essential health
benefits covered (as defined in Sec. 1302(b) of the Affordable Care
Act and its implementing regulations); and (9) a certification that the
plan substantially complies with the provisions of Title I of the
Affordable Care Act as applicable to non-grandfathered individual
health insurance coverage. If at any time HHS determines that a type of
coverage previously recognized as minimum essential coverage no longer
meets the coverage requirements, HHS may revoke the recognition of such
coverage. We solicited comments on whether there should be an appeal
process for sponsors of coverage that had the minimum essential
coverage status revoked by the Secretary. We also solicited comment on
whether this appeal process should be available to sponsors whose
initial request for recognition of minimal essential coverage status
for their coverage was denied by HHS.
The comment and our response are set forth below.
Comment: A commenter suggested that the process for designating
coverage not otherwise designated as minimum essential coverage should
include definitive timelines for the submission and consideration of
each plan applying to be designated at minimum essential coverage,
opportunities for such plans to exchange ideas with HHS, and an appeals
process for plans that are denied.
Response: We appreciate the commenter's suggestions regarding this
process and we will take them under further consideration while
developing this administrative process.
As previously stated, we solicited comments on the types of
criteria that the Secretary should require a sponsor to meet in order
for HHS to recognize the coverage of the organization as minimum
essential coverage and indicated that we might specify criteria for
sponsoring organizations. We did not get any comments specifically
addressing this issue, and we have decided that the focus of the CMS
review of applications for health coverage to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage will not be on the type of organization providing
coverage but on the extent of the coverage itself and the protections
provided in the coverage. We made minor changes to certification
requirement to clarify that the organization must certify that the
coverage substantially complies with the requirements of title I of the
Affordable Care Act that apply to non-grandfathered plans in the
individual market and the organization must submit any plan
documentation or other information that demonstrate that the coverage
substantially comply with these requirements.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We made minor changes to the provisions of Sec. 156.604 to clarify
that, in addition to the organization certifying that the coverage
substantially complies with the requirements of title I of the
Affordable Care Act that apply to non-grandfathered plans in the
individual market, the organization must submit any plan documentation
or other information that demonstrates that the coverage substantially
complies with these requirements.
d. HHS Audit Authority (Sec. 156.606)
Under this proposed rule, HHS would have the ability to audit plans
to ensure the accuracy of the certification either randomly or when
triggered by certain information. We solicited comments on the proposed
procedures and if and when audits should be conducted. We also
solicited comments on whether sponsors of the types of coverage that
have been designated as minimum essential coverage in the proposed rule
should also submit the above information required to HHS.
[[Page 39517]]
Under the proposed rule, once recognized as minimum essential
coverage, a plan would have to provide notice to its enrollees,
specifying that the plan has been recognized as minimum essential
coverage for the purposes of the individual shared responsibility
provision. The sponsor of any plan recognized as minimum essential
coverage would also be required to provide the annual information
reporting to the IRS specified in section 6055 of the Code and
implementing regulations and furnish statements to individuals enrolled
in such coverage to assist them in establishing that they are not
liable for the shared responsibility payment under section 5000A of the
Code. We requested comments on whether all plans and programs
designated as minimum essential coverage under this regulation must
provide notice to enrollees, or only plans recognized through the
process in Sec. 156.604 of this regulation.
Comment: A commenter suggested that the process for designating
coverage not otherwise designated as minimum essential coverage should
include definitive timelines for the submission and consideration of
each plan applying to be designated at minimum essential coverage,
opportunities for such plans to exchange ideas with HHS, and an appeals
process for plans that are denied.
Response: We appreciate the commenter's suggestions regarding this
process and we will take them under further consideration while
developing this administrative process.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
We made minor changes to the provisions of section 156.606 to
clarify the meaning of the final regulation.
III. Provisions of the Final Regulation
For the most part, this final rule incorporates the provisions of
the proposed rule. Those provisions of this final rule that differ
substantively from the proposed rule are as follows:
Changes to Sec. 155.605
Modifies eligibility standards for the religious
conscience exemption such that if an exemption is provided to an
individual under the age of 21, an exemption will be provided on a
continuing basis until the month after the individual's 21st birthday,
which triggers a corresponding notice and opportunity for the
individual turning 21 to file another application to maintain this
exemption.
Clarifies which hardship exemptions must be granted by the
Exchange and which are available solely through the tax filing process.
Clarifies that hardship exemption under paragraph (g)(1)
of this section must be granted for the month before, the month or
months during which an individual experiences the circumstances that
qualify as a hardship preventing him or her from purchasing a qualified
health plan, and the month after.
Clarifies that an eligible employer-sponsored plan is only
considered for the lack of affordable coverage based on projected
income hardship exemption if it meets the minimum value standard.
Specifies how the Exchange will determine the required
contribution to purchase coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored
plan or in the individual market for the lack of affordable coverage
based on projected income hardship exemption, including clarifying that
in determining the required contribution for an eligible employer-
sponsored plan, an individual who uses tobacco is treated as not
earning any premium incentive related to participation in a wellness
program designed to prevent or reduce tobacco use that is offered by an
eligible employer-sponsored plan, and wellness incentives offered by an
eligible employer-sponsored plan that do not relate to tobacco use are
treated as not earned.
Clarifies that the lack of affordable coverage based on
projected income hardship exemption is only available prospectively for
the month or months of a calendar year after which the exemption is
requested, and that it will be provided for all remaining months in a
coverage year, notwithstanding any change in an individual's
circumstances.
Adds a hardship exemption for any month in which an
individual is an Indian eligible for services through an Indian health
care provider, as defined in 42 CFR 447.50, or an individual eligible
for services through the Indian Health Service in accordance with 25
USC 1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3), and specifies that the duration of this
exemption is the same as that for a member of an Indian tribe.
Changes to Sec. 155.610
Clarifies that the Exchange must use information collected
for purposes of the eligibility determination for enrollment in a QHP
and for insurance affordability programs in making the exemption
eligibility determination to the extent that the Exchange finds that
such information is still applicable.
Specifies that at a minimum, the Exchange must provide a
paper application process for applications submitted prior to October
15, 2014.
Clarifies that hardship exemptions can also be provided
for previous tax years after December 31 of a given calendar year,
noting that the Exchange will only accept an application for an
exemption described in Sec. 155.605(g)(1) during one of the 3-calendar
years after the month or months during which the applicant attests that
the hardship occurred.
Clarifies that the Exchange will notify an individual to
retain records that demonstrate the receipt of a certificate of
exemption, as well as records demonstrating his or her qualification
for the underlying exemption.
Changes to Sec. 155.615
Clarifies how the Exchange will address a situation in
which an applicant attests to membership in a religious sect or
division that is not recognized under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code.
Clarifies how the Exchange will address a situation in
which an applicant attests to membership in an organization that is not
known to the Exchange as a health care sharing ministry based on
information provided by HHS.
Provides a process for establishing the list of health
care sharing ministries that meet the statutory standards.
Clarifies that the Exchange will not find that an
applicant's previous or current enrollment in health coverage is not
reasonably compatible with his or her attestation of membership in a
health care sharing ministry.
Clarifies that the Secretary of the Treasury will
administer the exemptions specified in Sec. 155.605(g)(3) and (5).
Clarifies the applicability of verification procedures
specified in 45 CFR subpart D to the lack of affordable coverage based
on projected income hardship exemption.
Specifies that the Exchange will use the same verification
procedures for the exemption for an individual who is eligible for
services through an Indian health care provider as it will use for the
exemption for members of a federally-recognized tribe.
Clarifies when an inconsistency process should be
triggered when certain data sources are not reasonably expected to be
available.
Allows an applicant 90 days to present satisfactory
documentary evidence to resolve an inconsistency.
Specifies how an Exchange must validate a Social Security
number for an individual seeking an exemption.
[[Page 39518]]
Changes to Sec. 155.620
Specifies that the Exchange will not conduct mid-year
redeterminations for the hardship exemption for an individual who has a
lack of affordable coverage based on projected household income, will
not require individuals receiving this exemption to report changes, and
will not send periodic reminders to report changes to individuals who
have this exemption.
Specifies that the Exchange will implement a change
resulting from a redetermination under this section for the month or
months after the month in which the redetermination occurs, such that a
certificate that was provided for the month in which the
redetermination occurs, and for prior months remains effective.
Changes to Sec. 155.625
Specifies that for applications submitted before October
15, 2014, a state-based Exchange can be approved if relying on HHS to
administer the entire eligibility process for exemptions, provided that
the Exchange furnishes any information available through the Exchange
that is necessary for an applicant to utilize the process administered
by HHS, and the Exchange call center and Internet Web site assist
consumers seeking exemptions.
Changes to Sec. 155.635
Clarifies that an Exchange relying on HHS to make
eligibility determinations for exemptions will not issue the
eligibility notice for applications submitted prior to October 15,
2014.
Changes to Sec. 156.600
Makes minor changes to the provisions of 45 CFR Sec.
156.600 to clarify the meaning of the regulation.
Changes to Sec. 156.602
Designates self-funded student health plans and state high
risk pools as minimum essential coverage for a one year transitional
period, and allows self-funded student health plans and state high risk
pools to apply to be recognized as minimum essential coverage through
the process outlined in Sec. 156.604 of the final rule after January
1, 2015.
Removes the designation of foreign health coverage and
AmeriCorps as minimum essential coverage. In order to be recognized as
minimum essential coverage, foreign health coverage and coverage for
AmeriCorps must follow the process for recognition explained in Sec.
156.604.
Changes to Sec. 156.604
Makes minor changes to the provisions of Sec. 156.604 to
clarify the meaning of the regulation.
Changes to Sec. 156.606
Makes minor changes to the provisions of 45 CFR Sec.
156.606 to clarify the meaning of the regulation.
IV. Collection of Information Requirements
The final rule entitled ``Exchange Functions: Eligibility for
Exemptions; Miscellaneous Minimum Essential Coverage Provisions''
finalizes standards with regard to the minimum function of an Exchange
to perform eligibility determinations and issue certificates of
exemption from the individual shared responsibility payment. The rule
also finalizes standards related to eligibility for exemptions,
including the verification and eligibility determination process,
eligibility redeterminations, options for conducting eligibility
determinations, and reporting related to exemptions. In addition, the
rule finalizes rules designating certain types of coverage as minimum
essential coverage and outlining substantive and procedural
requirements that other types of coverage must fulfill in order to be
recognized as minimum essential coverage under section 5000A(f)(5) of
the Code.
This section outlines the information collection requirements in
the proposed regulation on which we solicited public comment in the
exemptions proposed rule. We used data from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics to derive average costs for all estimates of salary in
establishing the information collection requirements. Salary estimates
included the cost of fringe benefits, calculated at 30.4 percent of
salary, which is based on the June 2012 Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation report by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Additionally, we used estimates from the Congressional Budget Office to
derive estimates of the number of exemption applications we anticipate
Exchanges to receive, and the number of exemption eligibility
determination notifications we anticipate Exchanges to generate.
Finally, this final rule describes an information collection
requirement for which we did not solicit public comment in the
exemptions proposed rule. The information collection requirement
related to Health Care Sharing Ministries will be addressed through a
separate notice and comment process under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA).
1. Exemption Application (Sec. 155.610)
Throughout this subpart, we specify that the Exchange will collect
attestations from applicants for a certificate of exemption. These
attestations will be collected using the application described in Sec.
155.610(a). In Sec. 155.610(a), we provide that the Exchange use an
application created by HHS to collect the information necessary for
determining eligibility for and granting certificates of exemption from
the individual shared responsibility payment. The burden associated
with this requirement is the time and effort estimated for an applicant
to complete an application. The exemption application may be available
in both paper and electronic formats. An electronic application process
would vary depending on each applicant's circumstances and which
exemption an applicant is applying for, such that an applicant is only
presented with questions relevant to the exemption for which he or she
is applying. The goal is to solicit sufficient information so that in
most cases no further inquiry will be needed. We estimate that on
average, it will take .27 hours (16 minutes) for an application filer
to complete an application, which is based on the estimates created for
the single, streamlined application for enrollment in a QHP \3\, with a
90 percent electronic/10 percent paper mix (noting that no specific
application channel is specified in this proposed rule). While the
Congressional Budget Office \4\ estimates that 24 million individuals
would be exempt from the individual shared responsibility payment in
2016, it is unclear how many individuals will seek these exemptions
from an Exchange. Some of these individuals will claim an exemption
through the tax filing process, others will be exempt but not need to
file for an exemption (for example those below the filing threshold),
while others will apply for and receive an exemption through the
Exchange. Therefore, of the 24 million individuals, we conservatively
anticipate that up to half will apply for an exemption through the
Exchange. We specifically sought comment on this assumption.
Accordingly, we estimate that approximately 12 million
[[Page 39519]]
applications for exemptions will be submitted to the Exchange for
calendar year 2016, for a total of 3.2 million burden hours. We note,
however, that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts saw a very small number
of individuals apply for exemptions from a similar individual shared
responsibility payment \5\. We also note that some individuals will
apply for an exemption but be determined ineligible for an exemption,
but it is difficult for us to estimate this number, and that in an
unknown number of cases, multiple individuals in a single household may
submit a single application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The estimates may be found in the information collection
request entitled, ``Data Collection to Support Eligibility
Determinations for Insurance Affordability Programs and Enrollment
through Affordable Insurance Exchanges, Medicaid and Children's
Health Insurance Program Agencies.''
\4\ Congressional Budget Office, ``Payments of Penalties for
Being Uninsured Under the Affordable Care Act,'' September 2012
https://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/09-19-12-Indiv_Mandate_Penalty.pdf.
\5\ Massachusetts Health Connector and Department of Revenue,
``Data on the Individual Mandate, Tax Year 2010'', June, 2012.
Retrieved from https://www.mahealthconnector.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We do not estimate any cost to the Exchanges of evaluating the
exemption applications. For the purposes of this estimate, we expect
all applications to be submitted electronically and processed through
the system, which would result in no additional labor costs to evaluate
and review the exemption applications. We requested comment on this
assumption.
We estimate that the cost to develop the exemption application will
be significantly less than the estimated cost of developing the
coverage application because the coverage application takes into
account additional factors necessary in order to perform eligibility
determinations for insurance affordability programs. We also note that
as with the coverage application, HHS will be releasing a model
application for use by Exchanges, which will significantly decrease the
burden associated with the implementation of the application. On
average, we estimate that the implementation of the exemption
application will take approximately 1,059 hours of software development
at a labor cost of $98.50 per hour, for a total cost of $104,312 per
Exchange and a total cost of $1,877,607 for 18 state-based Exchanges.
2. Notices (Sec. Sec. 155.610, 155.615, 155.620)
Several provisions in subpart G outline specific notices that the
Exchange will send to individuals during the exemption eligibility
determination process, including the notice of eligibility
determination described in Sec. 155.610(i). The purpose of these
notices is to alert an applicant of his or her eligibility
determination for an exemption and related actions taken by the
Exchange. To the extent that an applicant is determined eligible for an
exemption, the notice of eligibility determination described in Sec.
155.610(i) will serve as the certificate of exemption. Accordingly, we
do not provide a separate burden estimate for the certificates of
exemption described throughout this subpart. When possible, we
anticipate that the Exchange will consolidate notices when multiple
members of a household are applying together and receive an eligibility
determination at the same time. Consistent with 45 CFR 155.230(d), the
notice may be in paper or electronic format, based on the election of
an individual, will be in writing, and will be sent after an
eligibility determination has been made by the Exchange; these are the
same standards that are used for eligibility notices for enrollment in
a QHP through the Exchange and for insurance affordability programs, as
described in 45 CFR 155.310(g). It is difficult to estimate the number
of applicants that will opt for electronic versus paper notices,
although we anticipate that a large volume of applicants will request
electronic notification. We estimated the associated mailing costs for
the time and effort needed to mail notices in bulk to applicants who
request paper notices.
We expect that the exemption eligibility determination notice will
be dynamic and include information tailored to all possible outcomes of
an application throughout the eligibility determination process. A
health policy analyst, senior manager, and an attorney would review the
notice. HHS is currently developing model notices, which will decrease
the burden on Exchanges associated with developing such notices. If a
state opts to use the model notices provided by HHS, we estimate that
the Exchange effort related to the development and implementation of
the exemption eligibility determination notice will necessitate 44
hours from a health policy analyst at an hourly cost of $49.35 to learn
exemptions rules and draft notice text; 20 hours from an attorney at an
hourly cost of $90.14, and four hours from a senior manager at an
hourly cost of $79.08 to review the notice; and 32 hours from a
computer programmer at an hourly cost of $52.50 to conduct the
necessary development. In total, we estimate that this will take a
total of 100 hours for each Exchange, at a cost of approximately $5,971
per Exchange and a total cost of $107,469 for 18 state-based Exchanges.
For most notices outlined in subpart G of this proposed rule, we
estimate that the notice development as outlined in the paragraph
above, including the systems programming, would take each Exchange an
estimated 100 hours to complete in the first year.
We expect that the burden on the Exchange to maintain this notice
will be significantly lower than to develop it. We estimate that it
will take each professional approximately a quarter of the time to
maintain the notice as compared to developing the notice. Accordingly,
we estimate the maintenance of the eligibility determination notice in
subsequent years will necessitate 11 hours from a health policy analyst
at an hourly cost of $49.35; 5 hours from an attorney at an hourly cost
of $90.14; one hour from a senior manager at an hourly cost of $79.08
and eight hours from a computer programmer at an hourly cost of $52.50.
In total, we estimate that this will take a total of 25 hours for each
Exchange, at a cost of approximately $1,492 per Exchange and a total
cost of $26,856 for 18 state-based Exchanges.
Pursuant to section 5000A of the Code, the IRS must collect the
necessary data from QHP issuers to determine the national average
bronze monthly premiums in order to assist in the computation of the
shared responsibility payment. To assist the IRS, HHS must request the
monthly premium for all bronze level QHP's through all 51 Exchanges
from QHP issuers. The burden associated on states and QHP issuers is
already included in the information collection request entitled,
``Initial Plan Data Collection to Support QHP Certification and other
Financial Management and Exchange Operations,'' and as such, we do not
include a separate burden estimate here. As this information is already
being collected for another purpose, there will be no additional burden
on QHP issuers or states.
3. Electronic Transmissions (Sec. Sec. 155.615, 155.630)
Section 155.615 specifies that the Exchange will utilize applicable
procedures established under subpart D of the Exchange final rule in
order to obtain data through electronic data sources for purposes of
determining eligibility for and granting certificates of exemption.
This involves the electronic transmission of data through procedures
established under subpart D in order to verify an applicant's
incarceration status, to verify eligibility for qualifying coverage in
an eligible employer-sponsored plan, and to determine eligibility for
advance payments of the premium tax credit. Section 155.615 also
includes additional electronic transmissions that are specific to the
eligibility process for exemptions, including those related to health
care
[[Page 39520]]
sharing ministries and religious conscience. In section 155.630, we
proposed that the Exchange will provide relevant information to IRS
regarding certificates of exemption for the purposes of tax
administration, such as the name and other identifying information for
the individual who received the exemption. As we expect that these
transmissions of information will all be electronic, and through the
same channels used for reporting to IRS established in Sec. 155.340,
we do not anticipate for there to be any additional burden other than
that which is required to design the overall eligibility and enrollment
system. We do not provide a burden estimate for the electronic
transmissions, as the cost is incorporated into the development of the
IT system for the Exchange eligibility and enrollment system.
4. Verification and Change Reporting (Sec. Sec. 155.615, 155.620)
The Exchange will use the same verification processes for new
applications and for changes that are reported during the year. This
includes the process for situations in which the Exchange is unable to
verify the information necessary to determine an applicant's
eligibility, which is described in section 155.615(g). It is not
possible at this time to provide estimates for the number of applicants
for whom additional information will be required to complete an
eligibility determination, but we anticipate that this number will
decrease as applicants become more familiar with the eligibility
process for exemptions and as more data become available
electronically. As such, for now, we estimate the burden associated
with the processing of documentation for one submission from an
applicant. We note that the burden associated with this provision is
one hour for an individual to collect and submit documentation, and 12
minutes for eligibility support staff at an hourly cost of $28.66 to
review the documentation, for a total cost of $6 per document
submission.
5. ICRs Regarding Health Care Sharing Ministries (Sec. 155.615)
In order to facilitate the provision of an exemption for membership
in a health care sharing ministry to the members of such ministry, we
specify in Sec. 155.615(c)(2) that an organization that believes that
it meets the statutory standards to be considered a health care sharing
ministry will submit certain information to HHS. We are aware of four
organizations that have made public statements regarding their status
as a health care sharing ministry. We note that we will account for the
additional burden associated with healthcare sharing ministries in a
future information collection request that will go through the
requisite notice and comment period and subsequent OMB review and
approval process.
6. ICRs Regarding Agreements (Sec. 155.625)
These provisions specify that an Exchange that decides to utilize
the HHS service for making eligibility determinations for exemptions
for application submitted on or after October 15, 2014, will enter into
a written agreement with HHS. These agreements are necessary to ensure
that the use of the service will minimize burden on individuals, ensure
prompt determinations of eligibility without undue delay, and provide
for secure, timely transfers of application information.
The burden associated with these provisions is the time and effort
necessary for the Exchange to establish an agreement with HHS. We
estimate that the creation of the necessary agreement will necessitate
35 hours from a health policy analyst at an hourly cost of $49.35, and
35 hours from an operations analyst at an hourly cost of $54.45 to
develop the agreement; and 30 hours from an attorney at an hourly cost
of $90.14 and five hours from a senior manager at an hourly cost of
$79.14 to review the agreement. For the purpose of this estimate, we
assume that the 18 state-based Exchanges will utilize the HHS service
for exemptions. Accordingly, the total burden on the Exchange
associated with the creation of the necessary agreement will be
approximately 105 hours and $6,733 per Exchange, for a total cost of
$121,194 for 18 Exchanges.
7. ICRs Regarding Minimum Essential Coverage (Sec. Sec. 156.604(a)(3),
156.604(d))
Organizations that currently provide health coverage that are not
statutorily specified and not designated as minimum essential coverage
in this regulation may submit a request to CMS that their coverage be
recognized as minimum essential coverage. As described in Sec.
156.604(a)(3), sponsoring organizations would have to electronically
submit to CMS information regarding their plans and certify that their
plans meet substantially all of the requirements in the Title I of
Affordable Care Act, as applicable to non-grandfathered, individual
coverage. Some commenters suggested that organizations submitting such
requests provide more information regarding their plans rather than
simply certifying that their plans meet substantially all of the
requirements in the Title I of Affordable Care Act. We have revised the
certification to request plan documentation or other information that
demonstrate that the coverage sponsored by the organization
substantially complies with the provisions of Title I of the Affordable
Care Act applicable to non-grandfathered individual health insurance
coverage.
We sought comments on how many organizations are likely to submit
such requests but did not receive any information that would allow us
to estimate the number of requests. We assume that at least 10
organizations will submit such a request. The burden associated with
this certification includes the time needed to collect and input the
necessary plan information, and maintain a copy for recordkeeping by
clerical staff and for a manager and legal counsel to review it and for
a senior executive to review and sign it. The certification and
attachments will be submitted to CMS electronically at minimal cost. We
estimate that it will take a combined total of 5.25 hours (4 hours for
clerical staff at an hourly cost of $30.64, 0.5 hours for a manager at
an hourly cost of $55.22, 0.5 hours for legal counsel at an hourly cost
of $83.10 and 0.25 hours for a senior executive at an hourly cost of
$112.43) to prepare and submit the information and certification to CMS
and to retain a copy for recordkeeping purposes. The total cost for one
organization is estimated to be approximately $220. Therefore, the
total burden for 10 organizations will be 52.5 hours, with an
equivalent cost of $2,200.
Section 156.604(d) specifies that sponsoring organizations whose
health coverage are recognized as minimum essential coverage will have
to provide a notice to enrollees informing them that the plan has been
recognized as minimum essential coverage for the purposes of the Code.
The notice requirement may be satisfied by inserting a statement into
existing plan documents. Plan documents are usually reviewed and
updated annually before a new plan year begins. Sponsoring
organizations may insert the statement in their plan documents at that
time at minimal cost. Once the notice is included in the plan documents
the first year, no additional cost will be incurred in future years.
Therefore this notice is not subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995. Commenters suggested that a sponsoring organization should be
required to provide a notice to enrollees if its request is denied and
its plan is not recognized as minimum essential coverage. To minimize
the burden on
[[Page 39521]]
sponsoring organizations, we are not requiring such a notice.
The sponsor of any type of coverage recognized as minimum essential
coverage is also required to provide the annual information reporting
to the IRS specified in section 6055 of the Code and furnish statements
to individuals enrolled in such coverage to assist them in establishing
that they are not liable for the shared responsibility payment under
section 5000A of the Code. The Department of Treasury plans to publish
for public comment, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the required ICRs in the near future.
Table 1--Annual Information Collection Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burden per
Regulation section(s) Description Number of Number of response Total annual
respondents responses (hours) burden (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 155.610............... Application 18 18 1,059 19,062
Development.
Sec. 155.610............... Application 12,000,000 12,000,000 0.27 3,200,000
Completion.
Sec. Sec. 155.610, 155.620 Notice 18 18 125 2,250
Development and
Maintenance.
Sec. 155.620............... Change Reporting 1 1 0.2 0.2
Sec. 155.625............... Agreements...... 18 18 105 1,890
Sec. Sec. 156.604(a)(3)... Minimum 10 10 5.25 52.5
Essential
Coverage
Certification.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................... ................ .............. .............. .............. 3,223,255
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Submission of PRA-Related Comments
We have submitted a copy of this final rule to OMB for its review
of the rule's information collection and recordkeeping requirements.
These requirements are not effective until they have been approved by
OMB.
To obtain copies of the supporting statement and any related forms
for the proposed paperwork collections referenced above, access the CMS
Web site at https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/PaperworkReductionActof1995/PRA-Listing.html, or call the Reports
Clearance Office at 410-786-1326.
V. Summary of Regulatory Impact Statement
A. Summary
As stated earlier in this preamble, this final rule implements
certain functions of the Exchanges. These specific statutory functions
include determining eligibility for and granting certificates of
exemption from the individual shared responsibility payment described
in section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code. Additionally, this final
rule implements the responsibility of the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, to
designate other health benefits coverage as minimum essential coverage
by designating certain coverage as minimum essential coverage. It also
outlines substantive and procedural requirements that other types of
individual coverage must fulfill in order to be recognized as minimum
essential coverage under the Internal Revenue Code.
HHS has crafted this rule to implement the protections intended by
Congress in an economically efficient manner. We have examined the
effects of this rule as required by Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
September 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review), the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96-354), section
1102(b) of the Social Security Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4), Executive Order 13132 on Federalism, and the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). In accordance with OMB
Circular A-4, CMS has quantified the benefits, costs and transfers
where possible, and has also provided a qualitative discussion of some
of the benefits, costs and transfers that may stem from this final
rule.
B. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735) directs agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects; distributive impacts; and equity). Executive
Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) is supplemental to and
reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review as established in Executive Order 12866.
Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a ``significant
regulatory action'' as an action that is likely to result in a final
rule--(1) having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more in any one year, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities
(also referred to as ``economically significant''); (2) creating a
serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raising novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) must be prepared for major rules
with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1
year), and a ``significant'' regulatory action is subject to review by
the OMB. This rule has been designated a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, OMB has reviewed
this final regulation pursuant to the Executive Order.
1. Need for Regulatory Action
This final rule sets forth standards and processes under which the
Exchange will conduct eligibility determinations for and grant
certificates of exemption from the individual shared responsibility
payment. Furthermore, it supports and complements rulemaking conducted
by the Secretary of the Treasury with respect to section 5000A of the
Code, as added by section 1501(b) of the Affordable Care Act. The
intent of this rule is to implement the relevant provisions while
continuing to afford states substantial discretion in the design and
operation of an Exchange, with greater standardization provided where
directed by the statute or where
[[Page 39522]]
there are compelling practical, efficiency, or consumer protection
reasons. In addition, this final rule provides standards for
determining whether certain other types of health insurance coverage
constitute minimum essential coverage and procedures for sponsors to
follow for a plan to be identified as minimum essential coverage under
section 5000A of the Code. This rule also designates certain types of
existing health coverage as minimum essential coverage. Other types of
coverage, not statutorily specified and not designated as minimum
essential coverage in this regulation, may be recognized as minimum
essential coverage if certain substantive and procedural requirements
are met as set forth in this rule.
2. Summary of Impacts
In developing this final rule, HHS carefully considered its
potential effects including costs and benefits. Because of data
limitations, HHS did not attempt to quantify the benefits, costs and
transfers resulting from this final rule. Nonetheless, HHS was able to
identify several potential impacts which are discussed qualitatively
below.
The exemption provisions of this final rule set forth how and what
exemptions can be received through the Exchange. Given the statute,
these rules would generate exemption request activity; the final rules
could also potentially affect the amount of shared responsibility
payments made in a given year and the number of individuals who would
enroll in health insurance plans to avoid shared responsibility
payments. The impact of the minimum essential coverage provisions would
be similar; individuals whose coverage would be designated minimum
essential coverage, under the authority of the Secretary of Health and
Human Services to designate other health benefit coverage as minimum
essential coverage, would, in the absence of the rule, pay shared
responsibility payments or switch health insurance coverage so as not
to incur those penalties.
As noted in our discussion, above, of information collection
requirements, while CBO estimates that 24 million individuals would be
exempt from the penalty in 2016, it is unclear how many individuals
will seek these exemptions from an Exchange. These submissions would be
associated with a variety of effects, including: costs to Exchanges to
review the exemption requests; costs to applicants to request
exemptions and retain documents; potential effects on enrollment in
health coverage and its benefits; and a transfer from the federal
government to individuals receiving exemptions in cases in which there
is a foregone shared responsibility payment.
We note that the cost to an applicant of submitting a request and
retaining documents is bounded by the expected shared responsibility
payment; otherwise, he or she would not necessarily apply for the
exemption. Though we lack data to precisely characterize the effects of
these provisions, we note that the potential number of individuals
seeking exemptions through the Exchange could place the overall impact
of the final rule over the $100 million threshold for economic
significance, even at a low economic cost per individual.
The minimum essential coverage provisions included in this final
rule could lead to transfers from the federal government to affected
individuals (in this case, individuals whose coverage is designated to
be minimum essential coverage) and have effects on health coverage
enrollment (for example, decreased switching between plans). Decreased
switching between plans would entail time savings for affected
individuals and uncertain effects on premium payments and use of
medical services and products. We currently lack data to estimate the
number of individuals whose coverage would be designated minimum
essential coverage by this rule.
C. Alternatives Considered
Under the Executive Order, HHS is required to consider alternatives
to issuing rules and alternative regulatory approaches. HHS considered
the regulatory alternatives below:
1. Grant Certificates for All Categories of Exemptions
Section 155.605 provides the eligibility standards for exemptions
that will be granted by the Exchange. The preamble to this section
notes that Exchanges will not grant certificates of exemption in four
categories: (1) Lack of affordable coverage; (2) household income below
the filing threshold; (3) not lawfully present; and (4) short coverage
gaps. Also, Exchanges will not grant certificates of exemptions for
certain hardship exemptions, specifically Sec. 155.605(g)(3) and (5).
These exemptions instead are solely available during the tax filing
process, as we believe that the IRS is in a better position to issue
these exemptions.
The alternative model would specify that the Exchange would provide
certificates of exemption in all nine categories described in section
5000A of the Code. This alternative model was not selected for
practical and administrative reasons; the specific reasons for taking
this approach are discussed in the preamble associated with this
section of the final regulation. For example, for certain categories of
exemptions, the information needed will only be available on a
retrospective basis, and is most efficiently available through the tax
filing process. Thus, we believe that the least burdensome approach for
individuals and Exchanges is to make these exemptions available only
through the tax filing process.
2. Designation of State High Risk Pools, Self-Funded Student Health
Plans and AmeriCorps as Minimum Essential Coverage
We considered designating state high risk pools, self-funded
student health plans, foreign health coverage and AmeriCorps as minimum
essential coverage in section 156.602. After careful review of comments
received, state high risk pools and self-funded student health plans
will be designated as minimum essential coverage for plan or policy
years beginning on or before December 31, 2014. For coverage beginning
after December 31, self-funded student health plans and state high risk
pools may apply to be recognized as minimum essential coverage. HHS
hopes that during this transitional year, such plans will voluntarily
adopt Affordable Care Act consumer protections to ensure their
qualification as minimum essential coverage. We also considered
automatically designating AmeriCorps and foreign health coverage as
minimum essential coverage but did not adopt that policy in this final
rule. These types of coverage may be recognized as minimum essential
coverage through the certification process outlined in Sec. 156.604 of
this final rule. We believe that the options adopted in this final rule
provide the best balance between allowing individuals to retain their
current coverage and ensuring that they receive the consumer
protections in the Affordable Care Act.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) (RFA)
requires agencies to prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis
to describe the impact of the rule on small entities, unless the head
of the agency can certify that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Act
generally defines a ``small entity'' as (1) a proprietary firm meeting
the size standards of the Small Business Administration (SBA); (2) a
not-for-
[[Page 39523]]
profit organization that is not dominant in its field; or (3) a small
government jurisdiction with a population of less than 50,000. States
and individuals are not included in the definition of ``small entity.''
HHS uses as its measure of significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities a change in revenues of more than 3 to 5
percent. As the burden for this final regulation falls on either
Exchanges or individuals, the finalized regulations will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
and therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
VII. Unfunded Mandates
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any 1 year of $100
million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation, by state,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector. In 2013, that threshold is approximately $141 million. This
final rule does not mandate expenditures by state governments, local
governments, tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector, of $141 million. The majority of state, local, and private
sector costs related to implementation of the Affordable Care Act were
described in the RIA accompanying the March 2012 Medicaid eligibility
rule. Furthermore, this final rule does not set any mandate on states
to set up an Exchange.
VIII. Federalism
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an
agency must meet when it promulgates a final rule that imposes
substantial direct effects on states, preempts state law, or otherwise
has federalism implications. We note again that the impact of changes
related to implementation of the Affordable Care Act was described in
the RIA associated with the Exchange final rule. As discussed in the
Exchange final rule RIA, we have consulted with states to receive input
on how the various Affordable Care Act provisions codified in this
proposed rule would affect states.
Because states have flexibility in designing their Exchange, state
decisions will ultimately influence both administrative expenses and
overall premiums. However, because states are not required to create an
Exchange, these costs are not mandatory. For states electing to create
an Exchange, the initial costs of the creation of the Exchange will be
funded by Exchange Planning and Establishment Grants. After this time,
Exchanges will be financially self-sustaining with revenue sources left
to the discretion of the state. In the Department's view, while this
proposed rule does not impose substantial direct costs on state and
local governments, it has federalism implications due to direct effects
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the state and
federal governments relating to determining standards relating to
health insurance coverage (that is, for QHPs) that is offered in the
individual and small group markets. Each state electing to establish a
state-based Exchange must adopt the federal standards contained in the
Affordable Care Act and in this proposed rule, or have in effect a
state law or regulation that implements these federal standards.
However, the Department anticipates that the federalism implications
(if any) are substantially mitigated because states have choices
regarding the structure and governance of their Exchanges.
Additionally, the Affordable Care Act does not require states to
establish an Exchange; but if a state elects not to establish an
Exchange or the state's Exchange is not approved, HHS, will establish
and operate an Exchange in that state. Additionally, states will have
the opportunity to participate in state Partnership Exchanges that
would allow states to leverage work done by other states and the
federal government, and will be able to leverage a federally-managed
service for eligibility determination for exemptions.
In compliance with the requirement of Executive Order 13132 that
agencies examine closely any policies that may have federalism
implications or limit the policy making discretion of the states, the
Department has engaged in efforts to consult with and work
cooperatively with affected states, including participating in
conference calls with and attending conferences of the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners, and consulting with state
officials on an individual basis.
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in section 8(a) of Executive
Order 13132, and by the signatures affixed to this regulation, the
Department certifies that CMS has complied with the requirements of
Executive Order 13132 for the attached final regulation in a meaningful
and timely manner.
IX. Congressional Review Act
This rule is subject to the Congressional Review Act provisions of
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.), which specifies that before a rule can take
effect, the federal agency promulgating the rule shall submit to each
House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General a report
containing a copy of the rule along with other specified information,
and has been transmitted to the Congress and the Comptroller General
for review.
List of Subjects
45 CFR Part 155
Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Brokers,
Conflict of interest, Consumer protection, Grant programs--health,
Grants administration, Health care, Health insurance, Health
maintenance organization (HMO), Health records, Hospitals, Indians,
Individuals with disabilities, Loan programs-health, Organization and
functions (Government agencies), Medicaid, Public assistance programs,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety, State and local
governments, Technical assistance, Women, and Youth.
45 CFR Part 156
Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Advisory
committees, Brokers, Conflict of interest, Consumer protection, Grant
programs--health, Grants administration, Health care, Health insurance,
Health maintenance organization (HMO), Health records, Hospitals,
Indians, Individuals with disabilities, Loan programs-health,
Organization and functions (Government agencies), Medicaid, Public
assistance programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
State and local governments, Sunshine Act, Technical Assistance, Women,
and Youth.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of Health
and Human Services amends 45 CFR subtitle A, subchapter B, as set forth
below:
PART 155--EXCHANGE ESTABLISHMENT STANDARDS AND OTHER RELATED
STANDARDS UNDER THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT
0
1. The authority citation for part 155 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Title I of the Affordable Care Act, sections 1301,
1302, 1303, 1304, 1311, 1312, 1313, 1321, 1322, 1331, 1334, 1402,
1411, 1412, 1413, Pub. L. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (42 U.S.C. 18021-
18024, 18031-18033, 18041-18042, 18051, 18054, 18071, and 18081-
18083.
0
2. Amend Sec. 155.20 by revising the introductory text to paragraph
(1) for the definition of ``Applicant'' and revising the definition of
``Application filer'' to read as follows:
[[Page 39524]]
Sec. 155.20 Definitions.
* * * * *
Applicant means:
(1) An individual who is seeking eligibility for him or herself
through an application submitted to the Exchange, excluding those
individuals seeking eligibility for an exemption from the individual
shared responsibility payment pursuant to subpart G of this part, or
transmitted to the Exchange by an agency administering an insurance
affordability program for at least one of the following:
* * * * *
Application filer means an applicant, an adult who is in the
applicant's household, as defined in 42 CFR 435.603(f), or family, as
defined in 26 CFR 1.36B-1(d), an authorized representative of an
applicant, or if the applicant is a minor or incapacitated, someone
acting responsibly for an applicant, excluding those individuals
seeking eligibility for an exemption from the individual shared
responsibility payment pursuant to subpart G of this part.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 155.200, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 155.200 Functions of an Exchange.
(a) General requirements. The Exchange must perform the minimum
functions described in this subpart and in subparts D, E, G, H, and K
of this part.
* * * * *
0
4. Add subpart G to part 155 to read as follows:
Subpart G--Exchange Functions in the Individual Market: Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions.
Sec.
155.600 Definitions and general requirements.
155.605 Eligibility standards for exemptions.
155.610 Eligibility process for exemptions.
155.615 Verification process related to eligibility for exemptions.
155.620 Eligibility redeterminations for exemptions during a
calendar year.
155.625 Options for conducting eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
155.630 Reporting.
155.635 Right to appeal.
Subpart G--Exchange Functions in the Individual Market: Eligibility
Determinations for Exemptions
Sec. 155.600 Definitions and general requirements.
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this subpart, the following terms
have the following meaning:
Applicant means an individual who is seeking an exemption for him
or herself through an application submitted to the Exchange.
Application filer means an applicant, an individual who is liable
for the shared responsibility payment in accordance with section 5000A
of the Code for an applicant, an authorized representative, or if the
applicant is a minor or incapacitated, someone acting responsibly for
an applicant.
Exemption means an exemption from the shared responsibility
payment.
Health care sharing ministry has the same meaning as it does in
section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
Indian tribe has the same meaning as it does in section 45A(c)(6)
of the Code.
Required contribution has the same meaning as it does in section
5000A(e)(1)(B) of the Code.
Shared responsibility payment means the payment imposed with
respect to a non-exempt individual who does not maintain minimum
essential coverage in accordance with section 5000A(b) of the Code.
Tax filer has the same meaning as it does in Sec. 155.300(a).
(b) Attestation. For the purposes of this subpart, any attestation
that an applicant is to provide under this subpart may be made by the
application filer on behalf of the applicant.
(c) Reasonably compatible. For purposes of this subpart, the
Exchange must consider information through electronic data sources,
other information provided by the applicant, or other information in
the records of the Exchange to be reasonably compatible with an
applicant's attestation if the difference or discrepancy does not
impact the eligibility of the applicant for the exemption or exemptions
for which he or she applied.
(d) Accessibility. Information, including notices, forms, and
applications, must be provided to applicants in accordance with the
standards specified in Sec. 155.205(c).
(e) Notices. Any notice required to be sent by the Exchange to an
individual in accordance with this subpart must be provided in
accordance with the standards specified in Sec. 155.230.
Sec. 155.605 Eligibility standards for exemptions.
(a) Eligibility for an exemption through the Exchange. Except as
specified in paragraph (g) of this section, the Exchange must determine
an applicant eligible for and issue a certificate of exemption for any
month if the Exchange determines that he or she meets the requirements
for one or more of the categories of exemptions described in this
section for at least one day of the month.
(b) Duration of single exemption. Except as specified in paragraphs
(c)(2), (f)(2), and (g) of this section, the Exchange may provide a
certificate of exemption only for the calendar year in which an
applicant submitted an application for such exemption.
(c) Religious conscience. (1) The Exchange must determine an
applicant eligible for an exemption for any month if the applicant is a
member of a recognized religious sect or division described in section
1402(g)(1) of the Code, and an adherent of established tenets or
teachings of such sect or division, for such month in accordance with
section 5000A(d)(2)(A) of the Code.
(2) Duration of exemption for religious conscience. (i) The
Exchange must grant the certificate of exemption specified in this
paragraph to an applicant who meets the standards provided in paragraph
(c)(1) of this section for a month on a continuing basis, until the
month after the month of the individual's 21st birthday, or until such
time that an individual reports that he or she no longer meets the
standards provided in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(ii) If the Exchange granted a certificate of exemption in this
category to an applicant prior to his or her reaching the age of 21,
the Exchange must send the applicant a notice upon reaching the age of
21 informing the applicant that he or she must submit a new exemption
application to maintain the certificate of exemption.
(3) The Exchange must make an exemption in this category available
prospectively or retrospectively.
(d) Membership in a health care sharing ministry. (1) The Exchange
must determine an applicant eligible for an exemption for a month if
for such month the applicant is a member of a health care sharing
ministry as defined in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
(2) The Exchange must make an exemption in this category available
only retrospectively.
(e) Incarceration. (1) The Exchange must determine an applicant
eligible for an exemption for a month if he or she meets the standards
in section 5000A(d)(4) of the Code for such month.
(2) The Exchange must make an exemption in this category available
only retrospectively.
(f) Membership in an Indian tribe. (1) The Exchange must determine
an applicant eligible for an exemption for any month if he or she is a
member of an Indian tribe, as defined in section 45A(c)(6) of the Code,
for such month, as provided in section 5000A(e)(3) of the Code.
[[Page 39525]]
(2) Duration of exemption for membership in an Indian tribe. The
Exchange must grant the exemption specified in this paragraph to an
applicant who meets the standards specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section for a month on a continuing basis, until such time that the
applicant reports that he or she no longer meets the standards provided
in paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
(3) The Exchange must make an exemption available in this category
prospectively or retrospectively.
(g) Hardship--(1) General. The Exchange must grant a hardship
exemption to an applicant eligible for an exemption for at least the
month before, a month or months during which, and the month after, if
the Exchange determines that--
(i) He or she experienced financial or domestic circumstances,
including an unexpected natural or human-caused event, such that he or
she had a significant, unexpected increase in essential expenses that
prevented him or her from obtaining coverage under a qualified health
plan;
(ii) The expense of purchasing a qualified health plan would have
caused him or her to experience serious deprivation of food, shelter,
clothing or other necessities; or
(iii) He or she has experienced other circumstances that prevented
him or her from obtaining coverage under a qualified health plan.
(2) Lack of affordable coverage based on projected income. The
Exchange must determine an applicant eligible for an exemption for a
month or months during which he or she, or another individual the
applicant attests will be included in the applicant's family, as
defined in 26 CFR 1.36B-1(d), is unable to afford coverage in
accordance with the standards specified in section 5000A(e)(1) of the
Code, provided that--
(i) Eligibility for this exemption is based on projected annual
household income;
(ii) An eligible employer-sponsored plan is only considered under
paragraphs (g)(2)(iii) and (iv) of this section if it meets the minimum
value standard described in Sec. 156.145 of this subchapter.
(iii) For an individual who is eligible to purchase coverage under
an eligible employer-sponsored plan, the Exchange determines the
required contribution for coverage such that--
(A) An individual who uses tobacco is treated as not earning any
premium incentive related to participation in a wellness program
designed to prevent or reduce tobacco use that is offered by an
eligible employer-sponsored plan;
(B) Wellness incentives offered by an eligible employer-sponsored
plan that do not relate to tobacco use are treated as not earned;
(C) In the case of an employee who is eligible to purchase coverage
under an eligible employer-sponsored plan sponsored by the employee's
employer, the required contribution is the portion of the annual
premium that the employee would pay (whether through salary reduction
or otherwise) for the lowest cost self-only coverage.
(D) In the case of an individual who is eligible to purchase
coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan as a member of the
employee's family, as defined in 26 CFR 1.36B-1(d), the required
contribution is the portion of the annual premium that the employee
would pay (whether through salary reduction or otherwise) for the
lowest cost family coverage that would cover the employee and all other
individuals who are included in the employee's family who have not
otherwise been granted an exemption through the Exchange.
(iv) For an individual who is ineligible to purchase coverage under
an eligible employer-sponsored plan, the Exchange determines the
required contribution for coverage in accordance with section
5000A(e)(1)(B)(ii) of the Code, inclusive of all members of the family,
as defined in 26 CFR 1.36B-1(d), who have not otherwise been granted an
exemption through the Exchange and who are not treated as eligible to
purchase coverage under an eligible employer-sponsored plan, in
accordance with paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section; and
(v) The applicant applies for this exemption prior to the last date
on which he or she could enroll in a QHP through the Exchange for the
month or months of a calendar year for which the exemption is
requested.
(vi) The Exchange must make an exemption in this category available
prospectively, and provide it for all remaining months in a coverage
year, notwithstanding any change in an individual's circumstances.
(3) Filing threshold. The IRS may allow an applicant to claim an
exemption for a calendar year if he or she was not required to file an
income tax return for such calendar year because his or her gross
income was below the filing threshold, but who nevertheless filed,
claimed a dependent with a filing requirement, and as a result, had
household income exceeding the applicable return filing threshold
described in section 5000A(e)(2) of the Code;
(4) Ineligible for Medicaid based on a state's decision not to
expand. The Exchange must determine an applicant eligible for an
exemption for a calendar year if he or she has been determined
ineligible for Medicaid for one or more months during the benefit year
solely as a result of a State not implementing section 2001(a) of the
Affordable Care Act;
(5) Self-only coverage in an eligible employer-sponsored plan. The
IRS may allow an applicant to claim an exemption for a calendar year if
he or she, as well as one or more employed members of his or her
family, as defined in 26 CFR 1.36B-1(d), has been determined eligible
for affordable self-only employer-sponsored coverage pursuant to
section 5000A(e)(1) of the Code through their respective employers for
one or more months during the calendar year, but the aggregate cost of
employer-sponsored coverage for all the employed members of the family
exceeds 8 percent of household income for that calendar year; or
(6) Eligible for services through an Indian health care provider.
(i) The Exchange must determine an applicant eligible for an exemption
for any month if he or she is an Indian eligible for services through
an Indian health care provider, as defined in 42 CFR 447.50 and not
otherwise eligible for an exemption under paragraph (f) of this
section, or an individual eligible for services through the Indian
Health Service in accordance with 25 USC 1680c(a), (b), or (d)(3).
(ii) The Exchange must grant the exemption specified in paragraph
(g)(6) of this section to an applicant who meets the standards
specified in paragraph (g)(6) of this section for a month on a
continuing basis, until such time that the applicant reports that he or
she no longer meets the standards provided in paragraph (g)(6) of this
section.
Sec. 155.610 Eligibility process for exemptions.
(a) Application. Except as specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of
this section, the Exchange must use an application established by HHS
to collect information necessary for determining eligibility for and
granting certificates of exemption as described in Sec. 155.605.
(b) Alternative application. If the Exchange seeks to use an
alternative application, such application, as approved by HHS, must
request the minimum information necessary for the purposes identified
in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Exemptions through the eligibility process for coverage. If an
individual
[[Page 39526]]
submits the application described in Sec. 155.405 and then requests an
exemption, the Exchange must use information collected for purposes of
the eligibility determination for enrollment in a QHP and for insurance
affordability programs in making the exemption eligibility
determination, and must not request duplicate information or conduct
repeat verifications to the extent that the Exchange finds that such
information is still applicable, where the standards for such
verifications adhere to the standards specified in this subpart.
(d) Filing the exemption application. The Exchange must--
(1) Accept the application from an application filer; and
(2) Provide the tools to file an application.
(3) For applications submitted before October 15, 2014, the
Exchange must, at a minimum, accept the application by mail.
(e) Collection of Social Security Numbers. (1) The Exchange must
require an applicant who has a Social Security number to provide such
number to the Exchange.
(2) The Exchange may not require an individual who is not seeking
an exemption for himself or herself to provide a Social Security
number, except as specified in paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
(3) The Exchange must require an application filer to provide the
Social Security number of a tax filer who is not an applicant only if
an applicant attests that the tax filer has a Social Security number
and filed a tax return for the year for which tax data would be
utilized for verification of household income and family size for an
exemption under Sec. 155.605(g)(2) that requires such verification.
(f) Determination of eligibility; granting of certificates. The
Exchange must determine an applicant's eligibility for an exemption in
accordance with the standards specified in Sec. 155.605, and grant a
certificate of exemption to any applicant determined eligible.
(g) Timeliness standards. (1) The Exchange must determine
eligibility for exemption promptly and without undue delay.
(2) The Exchange must assess the timeliness of eligibility
determinations made under this subpart based on the period from the
date of application to the date the Exchange notifies the applicant of
its decision.
(h) Exemptions for previous tax years. (1) Except for the
exemptions described in Sec. 155.605(c), (f), and (g), after December
31 of a given calendar year, the Exchange will not accept an
application for an exemption that is available retrospectively for
months for such calendar year, and must provide information to
individuals regarding how to claim an exemption through the tax filing
process.
(2) The Exchange will only accept an application for an exemption
described in Sec. 155.605(g)(1) during one of the 3 calendar years
after the month or months during which the applicant attests that the
hardship occurred.
(i) Notification of eligibility determination for exemptions. The
Exchange must provide timely written notice to an applicant of any
eligibility determination made in accordance with this subpart. In the
case of a determination that an applicant is eligible for an exemption,
this notification must include the exemption certificate number for the
purposes of tax administration.
(j) Retention of records for tax compliance. (1) An Exchange must
notify an individual to retain the records that demonstrate receipt of
the certificate of exemption and qualification for the underlying
exemption.
(2) In the case of any factor of eligibility that is verified
through use of the special circumstances exception described in Sec.
155.615(h), the records that demonstrate qualification for the
underlying exemption are the information submitted to the Exchange
regarding the circumstances that warranted the use of the exception, as
well as records of the Exchange decision to allow such exception.
Sec. 155.615 Verification process related to eligibility for
exemptions.
(a) General rule. Unless a request for modification is granted
under paragraph (i) of this section, the Exchange must verify or obtain
information as provided in this section in order to determine that an
applicant is eligible for an exemption.
(b) Verification related to exemption for religious conscience. For
any applicant who requests an exemption based on religious conscience,
the Exchange must verify that he or she meets the standards specified
in Sec. 155.605(c) by--
(1) Except as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section,
accepting a form that reflects that he or she is exempt from Social
Security and Medicare taxes under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code;
(2) Except as specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) of this
section, accepting his or her attestation of membership in a religious
sect or division, and verifying that the religious sect or division to
which the applicant attests membership is recognized by the Social
Security Administration as an approved religious sect or division under
section 1402(g)(1) of the Code.
(3) If information provided by an applicant regarding his or her
membership in a religious sect or division is not reasonably compatible
with other information provided by the individual or in the records of
the Exchange, the Exchange must follow the procedures specified in
paragraph (g) of this section.
(4) If an applicant attests to membership in a religious sect or
division that is not recognized by the Social Security Administration
as an approved religious sect or division under section 1402(g)(1) of
the Code, the Exchange must provide the applicant with information
regarding how his or her religious sect or division can pursue
recognition under section 1402(g)(1) of the Code, and determine the
applicant ineligible for this exemption until such time as the Exchange
obtains information indicating that the religious sect or division has
been approved.
(c) Verification related to exemption for membership in a health
care sharing ministry. (1) For any applicant who requests an exemption
based on membership in a health care sharing ministry, the Exchange
must verify that the applicant meets the standards specified in Sec.
155.605(d) by, except as provided in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and
(c)(1)(ii) of this section, accepting his or her attestation; and
verifying that the health care sharing ministry to which the applicant
attests membership is known to the Exchange as a valid health care
sharing ministry based on data provided by HHS--
(i) If information provided by an applicant regarding his or her
membership in a health care sharing ministry is not reasonably
compatible with other information provided by the individual or in the
records of the Exchange, the Exchange must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (g) of this section. The Exchange may not
consider an applicant's prior or current enrollment in health coverage
as not reasonably compatible with an applicant's attestation of
membership in a health care sharing ministry.
(ii) If an applicant attests to membership in a health care sharing
ministry that is not known to the Exchange as a health care sharing
ministry based on information provided by HHS, the Exchange must
provide the applicant with information regarding how an organization
can pursue recognition under Sec. 155.615(c)(2), and determine the
applicant ineligible for this exemption until such time as HHS
[[Page 39527]]
notifies the Exchange that the health care sharing ministry's meets the
standards specified in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code.
(2) To be considered a health care sharing ministry for the
purposes of this subpart, an organization must submit information to
HHS that substantiates the organization's compliance with the standards
specified in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code. If at any time HHS
determines that an organization previously considered a health care
sharing ministry for the purposes of this subpart no longer meets the
standards specified in section 5000A(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the Code, HHS may
revoke its earlier decision regarding the status of the health care
sharing ministry.
(d) Verification related to exemption for incarceration. (1) For
any applicant who provides information attesting that he or she was
incarcerated for a given month in accordance with the standards
specified in Sec. 155.605(e), the Exchange must verify his or her
attestation through the same process as described in Sec. 155.315(e).
(2) To the extent that the Exchange is unable to verify an
applicant's attestation that he or she was incarcerated for a given
month in accordance with the standards specified in Sec. 155.605(e)
through the process described in Sec. 155.315(e), the Exchange must
follow the procedures specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
(e) Verification related to exemption for members of Indian tribes.
(1) For any applicant who provides information attesting that he or she
is a member of an Indian tribe, the Exchange must use the process
outlined in Sec. 155.350(c) to verify that the applicant is a member
of an Indian tribe.
(2) To the extent that the Exchange is unable to verify an
applicant's status as a member of an Indian tribe through the process
described in Sec. 155.350(c), the Exchange must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
(f) Verification related to exemption for hardshi--(1) In general.
For any applicant who requests an exemption based on hardship, except
for the hardship exemptions described in Sec. 155.605(g)(3) and (5),
the Exchange must verify whether he or she has experienced the hardship
to which he or she is attesting.
(2) Lack of affordable coverage based on projected income. (i) For
any applicant who requests an exemption based on the hardship described
in Sec. 155.605(g)(2), the Exchange must verify the unavailability of
affordable coverage through the procedures used to determine
eligibility for advance payments of the premium tax credit, as
specified in subpart D of this part, including the procedures described
in Sec. 155.315(c)(1), and the procedures used to verify eligibility
for qualifying coverage in an eligible employer-sponsored plan, as
specified in Sec. 155.320(e), except as specified in Sec.
155.615(f)(2)(ii).
(ii) The Exchange must accept an application filer's attestation
for an applicant regarding eligibility for minimum essential coverage
other than through an eligible employer-sponsored plan, instead of
following the procedures specified in Sec. 155.320(b).
(3) Eligible for services through an Indian health care provider.
For any applicant who requests an exemption based on the hardship
described in Sec. 155.605(g)(6), the Exchange must verify whether he
or she meets the standards specified in Sec. 155.605(g)(6) through the
same process described in Sec. 155.615(e).
(4) To the extent that the Exchange is unable to verify any of the
information needed to determine an applicant's eligibility for an
exemption based on hardship, the Exchange must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
(g) Inability to verify necessary information. Except as otherwise
specified in this subpart, for an applicant for whom the Exchange
cannot verify information required to determine eligibility for an
exemption, including but not limited to when electronic data is
required in accordance with this subpart but data for individuals
relevant to the eligibility determination for an exemption are not
included in such data sources or when electronic data is required but
it is not reasonably expected that data sources will be available
within the time period as specified in Sec. 155.315(f), the Exchange--
(1) Must make a reasonable effort to identify and address the
causes of such inconsistency, including typographical or other clerical
errors, by contacting the application filer to confirm the accuracy of
the information submitted by the application filer;
(2) If unable to resolve the inconsistency through the process
described in paragraph (g)(1) of this section, must--
(i) Provide notice to the applicant regarding the inconsistency;
and
(ii) Provide the applicant with a period of 90 days from the date
on which the notice described in paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this section is
sent to the applicant to either present satisfactory documentary
evidence via the channels available for the submission of an
application, as described in Sec. 155.610(d), except for by telephone,
or otherwise to resolve the inconsistency.
(3) May extend the period described in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this
section for an applicant if the applicant demonstrates that a good
faith effort has been made to obtain the required documentation during
the period.
(4) During the period described in paragraph (g)(1) and (g)(2)(ii)
of this section, must not grant a certificate of exemption based on the
information subject to this paragraph.
(5) If, after the period described in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this
section, the Exchange remains unable to verify the attestation, the
Exchange must determine the applicant's eligibility for an exemption
based on any information available from the data sources used in
accordance with this subpart, if applicable, unless such applicant
qualifies for the exception provided under paragraph (h) of this
section, and notify the applicant of such determination in accordance
with the notice requirements specified in Sec. 155.610(i), including
notice that the Exchange is unable to verify the attestation.
(h) Exception for special circumstances. For an applicant who does
not have documentation with which to resolve the inconsistency through
the process described in paragraph (g)(2) of this section because such
documentation does not exist or is not reasonably available and for
whom the Exchange is unable to otherwise resolve the inconsistency, the
Exchange must provide an exception, on a case-by-case basis, to accept
an applicant's attestation as to the information which cannot otherwise
be verified along with an explanation of circumstances as to why the
applicant does not have documentation.
(i) Flexibility in information collection and verification. HHS may
approve an Exchange Blueprint in accordance with Sec. 155.105(d) or a
significant change to the Exchange Blueprint in accordance with Sec.
155.105(e) to modify the methods to be used for collection of
information and verification as set forth in this subpart, as well as
the specific information required to be collected, provided that HHS
finds that such modification would reduce the administrative costs and
burdens on individuals while maintaining accuracy and minimizing delay,
and that applicable requirements under Sec. Sec. 155.260, 155.270, and
paragraph (j) of this section, and section 6103 of the Code with
respect to the confidentiality,
[[Page 39528]]
disclosure, maintenance, or use of such information will be met.
(j) Applicant information. The Exchange may not require an
applicant to provide information beyond the minimum necessary to
support the eligibility process for exemptions as described in this
subpart.
(k) Validation of Social Security number. (1) For any individual
who provides his or her Social Security number to the Exchange, the
Exchange must transmit the Social Security number and other identifying
information to HHS, which will submit it to the Social Security
Administration.
(2) To the extent that the Exchange is unable to validate an
individual's Social Security number through the Social Security
Administration, or the Social Security Administration indicates that
the individual is deceased, the Exchange must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (g) of this section, except that the Exchange
must provide the individual with a period of 90 days from the date on
which the notice described in paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this section is
received for the applicant to provide satisfactory documentary evidence
or resolve the inconsistency with the Social Security Administration.
The date on which the notice is received means 5 days after the date on
the notice, unless the individual demonstrates that he or she did not
receive the notice within the 5 day period.
Sec. 155.620 Eligibility redeterminations for exemptions during a
calendar year.
(a) General requirement. The Exchange must redetermine the
eligibility of an individual with an exemption granted by the Exchange
if it receives and verifies new information reported by such an
individual, except for the exemption described in Sec. 155.605(g)(2).
(b) Requirement for individuals to report changes. (1) Except as
specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the Exchange must
require an individual who has a certificate of exemption from the
Exchange to report any change with respect to the eligibility standards
for the exemption as specified in Sec. 155.605, except for the
exemption described in Sec. 155.605(g)(2), within 30 days of such
change.
(2) The Exchange must allow an individual with a certificate of
exemption to report changes via the channels available for the
submission of an application, as described in Sec. 155.610(d).
(c) Verification of reported changes. The Exchange must--
(1) Verify any information reported by an individual with a
certificate of exemption in accordance with the processes specified in
Sec. 155.615 prior to using such information in an eligibility
redetermination.
(2) Notify an individual in accordance with Sec. 155.610(i) after
redetermining his or her eligibility based on a reported change.
(3) Provide periodic electronic notifications regarding the
requirements for reporting changes and an individual's opportunity to
report any changes, to an individual who has a certificate of exemption
for which changes must be reported in accordance with Sec. 155.620(b)
and who has elected to receive electronic notifications, unless he or
she has declined to receive such notifications.
(d) Effective date of changes. The Exchange must implement a change
resulting from a redetermination under this section for the month or
months after the month in which the redetermination occurs, such that a
certificate that was provided for the month in which the
redetermination occurs, and for prior months remains effective.
Sec. 155.625 Options for conducting eligibility determinations for
exemptions.
(a) Options for conducting eligibility determinations. The Exchange
may satisfy the requirements of this subpart--
(1) Directly or through contracting arrangements in accordance with
Sec. 155.110(a); or (2) Through the approach described in paragraph
(b) of this section.
(b) Use of HHS service. Notwithstanding the requirements of this
subpart--
(1) For an application submitted before October 15, 2014, the
Exchange may adopt an exemption eligibility determination made by HHS,
provided that--
(i) The Exchange adheres to the eligibility determination made by
HHS;
(ii) The Exchange furnishes to HHS any information available
through the Exchange that is necessary for an applicant to utilize the
process administered by HHS; and
(iii) The Exchange call center and Internet Web site specified in
Sec. 155.205(a) and (b), respectively, provide information to
consumers regarding the exemption eligibility process.
(2) For an application submitted on or after October 15, 2014, the
Exchange may adopt an exemption eligibility determination made by HHS,
provided that--
(i) The Exchange accepts the application, as specified in Sec.
155.610(c), and issues the eligibility notice, as specified in Sec.
155.610(i);
(ii) Verifications and other activities required in connection with
eligibility determinations for exemptions are performed by the Exchange
in accordance with the standards identified in this subpart or by HHS
in accordance with the agreement described in paragraph (b)(2)(v) of
this section;
(iii) The Exchange transmits to HHS promptly and without undue
delay and via secure electronic interface, all information provided as
a part of the application or update that initiated the eligibility
determination, and any information obtained or verified by the
Exchange;
(iv) The Exchange adheres to the eligibility determination made by
HHS; and
(v) The Exchange and HHS enter into an agreement specifying their
respective responsibilities in connection with eligibility
determinations for exemptions.
Sec. 155.630 Reporting.
Requirement to provide information related to tax administration.
If the Exchange grants an individual a certificate of exemption in
accordance with Sec. 155.610(i), the Exchange must transmit to the IRS
at such time and in such manner as the IRS may specify--
(a) The individual's name, Social Security number, and exemption
certificate number;
(b) Any other information required in guidance published by the
Secretary of the Treasury in accordance with 26 CFR 601.601(d)(2).
Sec. 155.635 Right to appeal.
(a) For an application submitted before October 15, 2014, the
Exchange must include the notice of the right to appeal and
instructions regarding how to file an appeal in any notification issued
in accordance with Sec. 155.610(i).
(b) For an application submitted on or after October 15, 2014, the
Exchange must include the notice of the right to appeal and
instructions regarding how to file an appeal in any notification issued
in accordance with Sec. 155.610(i) and Sec. 155.625(b)(2)(i).
PART 156--HEALTH INSURANCE ISSUER STANDARDS UNDER THE AFFORDABLE
CARE ACT, INCLUDING STANDARDS RELATED TO EXCHANGES
0
5. The authority citation for part 156 is revised to read as follows:
[[Page 39529]]
Authority: Title I of the Affordable Care Act, Sections 1301-
1304, 1311-1312, 1321, 1322, 1324, 1334, 1341-1343, and 1401-1402,
1501, Pub. L. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (42 U.S.C. 18042).
0
6. Add subpart G to part 156 to read as follows:
Subpart G--Minimum Essential Coverage
Sec.
156.600 The definition of minimum essential coverage.
156.602 Other coverage that qualifies as minimum essential coverage.
156.604 Requirements for recognition as minimum essential coverage
for types of coverage not otherwise designated minimum essential
coverage in the statute or this subpart.
156.606 HHS audit authority.
Subpart G--Minimum Essential Coverage
Sec. 156.600 The definition of minimum essential coverage.
The term minimum essential coverage has the same meaning as
provided in section 5000A(f) of the Code and its implementing
regulations for purposes of this subpart.
Sec. 156.602 Other coverage that qualifies as minimum essential
coverage.
The following types of coverage are designated by the Secretary as
minimum essential coverage for purposes of section 5000A(f)(1)(E) of
the Code:
(a) Self-funded student health coverage. Coverage offered to
students by an institution of higher education (as defined in the
Higher Education Act of 1965), where the institution assumes the risk
for payment of claims, are designated as minimum essential coverage for
plan or policy years beginning on or before December 31, 2014. For
coverage beginning after December 31, 2014, sponsors of self-funded
student health coverage may apply to be recognized as minimum essential
coverage pursuant to the process provided under 45 CFR 156.604.
(b) Refugee Medical Assistance supported by the Administration for
Children and Families. Coverage under Refugee Medical Assistance,
authorized under section 412(e)(7)(A) of The Immigration and
Nationality Act, provides up to eight months of coverage to certain
noncitizens who are considered Refugees, as defined in section
101(a)(42) of the Act.
(c) Medicare advantage plans. Coverage under the Medicare program
pursuant to Part C of title XVIII of the Social Security Act, which
provides Medicare Parts A and B benefits through a private insurer.
(d) State high risk pool coverage. State high risk pools are
designated as minimum essential coverage for plan or policy years
beginning on or before December 31, 2014. For coverage beginning after
December 31, 2014, sponsors of high risk pool coverage may apply to be
recognized as minimum essential coverage pursuant to the process
provided under Sec. 156.604.
(e) Other coverage. Other coverage that qualifies pursuant to Sec.
156.604.
Sec. 156.604 Requirements for recognition as minimum essential
coverage for types of coverage not otherwise designated minimum
essential coverage in the statute or this subpart.
(a) The Secretary may recognize ``other coverage'' as minimum
essential coverage provided HHS determines that the coverage meets the
following substantive and procedural requirements:
(1) Coverage requirements. A plan must meet substantially all the
requirements of title I of the Affordable Care Act pertaining to non-
grandfathered, individual health insurance coverage.
(2) Procedural requirements. Procedural requirements for
recognition as minimum essential coverage. To be considered for
recognition as minimum essential coverage, the sponsor of the coverage,
or government agency, must submit the following information to HHS:
(i) Identity of the plan sponsor and appropriate contact persons;
(ii) Basic information about the plan, including:
(A) Name of the organization sponsoring the plan;
(B) Name and title of the individual who is authorized to make, and
makes, this certification on behalf of the organization;
(C) Address of the individual named above;
(D) Phone number of the individual named above;
(E) Number of enrollees;
(F) Eligibility criteria;
(G) Cost sharing requirements, including deductible and out-of-
pocket maximum limit;
(H) Essential health benefits covered; and
(I) A certification by the appropriate individual, named pursuant
to paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(b), that the organization substantially
complies with the requirements of title I of the Affordable Care Act
that apply to non-grandfathered plans in the individual market and any
plan documentation or other information that demonstrate that the
coverage substantially comply with these requirements.
(b) CMS will publish a list of types of coverage that the Secretary
has recognized as minimum essential coverage pursuant to this
provision.
(c) If at any time the Secretary determines that a type of coverage
previously recognized as minimum essential coverage no longer meets the
coverage requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the
Secretary may revoke the recognition of such coverage.
(d) Notice. Once recognized as minimum essential coverage, a plan
must provide notice to all enrollees of its minimum essential coverage
status and must comply with the information reporting requirements of
section 6055 of the Code and implementing regulations.
Sec. 156.606 HHS audit authority.
The Secretary may audit a plan or program recognized as minimum
essential coverage under Sec. 156.604 at any time to ensure compliance
with the requirements of Sec. 156.604(a).
Dated: June 7, 2013.
Marilyn Tavenner,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Approved: June 11, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-15530 Filed 6-26-13; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P