|
Retirement Compliance Resource
| D|A Financial Group is pleased to announce a new resource for our clients. Please click on the link below for a PDF copy of Volume 1, Issue 3 of the Retirement Legal and Compliance Update. The current issue of the Retirement Legal & Compliance Newsletter includes a discussion of the Department of Labor's (DOL) regulatory agenda, a discussion of the final regulations issued on diversification of company stock, guidance issued regarding target date retirement funds, changes to 2009 Form 5500 and schedules, information on the 401(k) compliance check questionnaire, a frequently asked question concerning highly compensated employees, as well as an update of recent cases involving fiduciaries.
For more information on retirement planning, please contact your representative, or send an email to info@dafg.com.
|

|
INTERIM FINAL RULES RELEASED: INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL REVIEW FOR DENIED CLAIMS
| |
The Departments of the
Treasury, Labor (DOL) and Health and Human Services (HHS) issued interim final
regulations imposing new requirements on group health plans (both self-funded
and fully insured) that dictate procedures for internal appeals of adverse
claims decisions and require an independent external appeal process for denied
health plan claims. The new regulations expand the types of decisions to which
the appeal procedures apply, and generally modify or expand requirements under
the existing DOL claims procedure regulations.
The proposed regulations would
also impose new notice requirements, add requirements to the "full and
fair review" standard (such as requiring a claim denial to include an
explanation of the "rationale" for the denial), and impose
impartiality standards for decision-makers. Covered plans must include a description
of the new internal review process requirements and the plan's external review
process in all summary plan descriptions, insurance policies, certificates of
coverage, membership booklets, outlines of coverage or other evidence of
coverage provided to participants in accordance with the Uniform Health Carrier
External Review Model Act developed by the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (NAIC).
Generally, these proposed
regulations would apply to non-grandfathered insured and self-funded group
health plans (or plans that lose their grandfathered status) the first plan
year beginning on or after Sept. 23, 2010. Therefore, for calendar-year plans,
the effective date of these new regulations will be Jan. 1, 2011.
Source: Littler Mendelson
|
DOL ISSUES NURSING MOTHERS FACT SHEET
| |
A new fact sheet issued by the
DOL's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) explains employers' obligations under the
break time requirement for nursing mothers found in the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
Employers must provide
reasonable amounts of unpaid break time and a private place for breast-feeding
employees to express milk, according to Fact Sheet #73, "Break Time for
Nursing Mothers under the FLSA." The PPACA, which took effect in March,
amended Section 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act(FLSA). Employers must provide
"a reasonable amount of break time to express milk as frequently as needed
by the nursing mother," WHD states, noting that the frequency and duration
of breaks "will likely vary." Employers also must provide "a
place, other than a bathroom, that is shielded from view and free from
intrusion from coworkers and the public," where the employee may express
breast milk. If a space is temporarily converted into a lactation area, it must
be available whenever the nursing mother needs it, the fact sheet explains. Employers
must meet these provisions for one year after an employee's child is born.
The FLSA nursing break
provisions cover only employees who are not exempt from the act's overtime pay
requirements, according to the fact sheet. WHD cautions, however, that state
laws may obligate employers to provide breaks to nursing mothers who are exempt
from overtime pay under federal law. Federal law does not require employers to
compensate nursing mothers for the breaks they take to express milk, WHD says,
but if an employer compensates employees for breaks, an employee who uses the
break time to express milk must be compensated in the same way that other
employees are compensated for break time. The agency reminds employers that
unless an employee is completely relieved from duty during break time, the time
counts as work time for which she must be paid. An employer with fewer than 50
employees at all of its work sites is not subject to the break time requirement
if compliance would cause an undue hardship. The existence of an undue hardship
is measured by comparing the difficulty or expense of compliance with the size,
financial resources, nature and structure of the employer's business.
The FLSA requirements do not
preempt state laws that provide employees with greater protections, such as
paid break time or coverage for more than one year. Examples of states that
currently require employers to accommodate nursing mothers include: Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois,
Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon,
Rhode Island, Tennessee and Vermont.
Click here to view the fact sheet.
|
HHS ISSUES INTERIM FINAL RULE ON PRE-EXISTING CONDITION INSURANCE PLAN PROGRAM
| |
Section 1101 of Title I of the
PPACA requires that the secretary of HHS establish, either directly or through
contracts with states or nonprofit private entities, a temporary high risk
health insurance pool program to provide affordable health insurance coverage
to uninsured individuals with pre-existing conditions. This program will
continue until Jan. 1, 2014, when the state-based Exchanges will be available
for individuals to obtain health insurance coverage. This interim final rule
establishes the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, or PCIP program, which
is separate from existing state high risk pool programs, and will continue to
operate separately from those programs. Key issues addressed in this interim
final rule include administration of the program, eligibility and enrollment,
benefits, premiums, funding, and appeals and oversight rules.
An individual is eligible to
enroll in a PCIP if he or she:
- is a citizen or national of the United States or is
lawfully present in the United States;
- has not been covered under creditable coverage, as of
March 23, 2010, during the six-month period prior to the date on which he
or she is applying for coverage through the PCIP; and
- has a pre-existing condition
According to the interim rule,
a pre-existing condition is defined as "a denial of coverage, or
limitation or exclusion of benefits, based on the fact that the individual
denied coverage or benefits had a health condition that was present before the
date of enrollment for the coverage (or a denial of enrollment), whether or not
any medical advice, diagnosis, care, or treatment was recommended or received
before that date. This would include exclusions stemming from a condition
identified via a pre-enrollment questionnaire or physical examination, or the
review of medical records during the preenrollment period." This
definition will be used in lieu of state specific definitions in order to
determine eligibility under the PCIP program.
Click here to view the interim regulations.
Click here to view the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan.
|
DOL ISSUES MODEL NOTICES FOR PPACA REQUIREMENTS
| |
The DOL's Employee Benefits
Security Administration (EBSA) has made a series of model notices available on
its website to help employers comply with various provisions of the PPACA. The
model notices apply to provisions of the PPACA that apply to Patient
Protections, Lifetime Limits, Grandfathered Status and Dependent Coverage to
Age 26.
The notices include background
information regarding each requirement, followed by model language that may be
used to satisfy the notice obligation.
- The Patient Protection Model Notice can be used to
satisfy the requirement that non-grandfathered health plans and insurers
provide notice to participants of their rights to (a) choose a primary
care provider or pediatrician from within the plan's network or (b) obtain
obstetrical or gynecological care without prior authorization. This notice
must be provided whenever the plan provides a participant with a Summary
Plan Description (SPD) or other summary of benefits - starting no later
than the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after Sept. 23,
2010.
- The Lifetime Limits Model Notice is to be used to
provide written notice to participants informing them that a lifetime
limit on the dollar value of all benefits no longer applies, and
individuals whose coverage ended by reason of reaching a lifetime limit
under the plan must be notified that they have 30 days in which to
re-enroll. The notices and enrollment opportunities, similar to the
Patient Protection Model Notice, must be provided by the first day of the
first plan year beginning on or after Sept. 23, 2010. Note, however, that
the notice can be included with a plan's enrollment materials (as opposed
to in the SPD), provided the statement is prominent.
- The Grandfathered Health Plans Model Notice is
sufficient for use by grandfathered plans to meet the requirement that
they include a statement that describes the benefits provided, the fact
that the plan or coverage considers itself grandfathered under PPACA, and
includes contact information that a participant can use to ask questions
or lodge a complaint.
- The Extension of Coverage For Adult Children Model
Notice contains the requisite information that must be sent to plan
participants that they have the opportunity to enroll their eligible adult
children by the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after
Sept. 23, 2010. If plans and insurers provide this notice at least 30 days
in advance of this date, however, they can avoid having to administer
retroactive enrollment. This notice may be included with a plan's
enrollment materials, provided again that the disclosure is prominent.
Source: Littler Mendelson
|
DOL WITHDRAWS DEFINITION OF WELFARE BENEFIT PLAN
| |
The U.S. DOL's EBSA announced
its intention to withdraw the proposed regulation on the definition of a
welfare benefit plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
from review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), effective July 30,
2010.
The regulation was submitted
to the OMB for review before the enactment of the PPACA. The proposed
regulation was intended to address issues relating to state health care efforts
and their effect on the maintenance of ERISA-covered welfare plans. With the
enactment of the PPACA, the department decided to review whether and to what
extent further regulation in this area is necessary or appropriate in light of
a national health care reform program.
Click here to view the press release.
|
NEW FORM 8955-SSA
| |
Pension plans, including
401(k) plans, previously filed Schedule SSA with Form 5500 to report terminated
participants who had not taken a distribution of their entire vested account
balances. In a special edition of its Employee
Plan News, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced that the
information will now be filed directly with the agency on Form 8955-SSA. The
obligation to file the old form with Form 5500 was eliminated to help
effectuate the all-electronic filing requirements for Form 5500 beginning with
the 2009 plan year. According to the IRS, the required information for Form
8955-SSA will be similar, if not identical, to that used on the Schedule SSA,
so plan administrators should collect the appropriate data and await further
guidance. The new Form 8955-SSA has not yet been released, but the IRS states
that it will have a "special due date," in 2011 to provide plan
administrators with a reasonable amount of time to complete and file. Because
Form 8955-SSA will be filed with the IRS, it will not go through the DOL's
EFAST2 filing system.
Click here to view guidance from the IRS.
|

|
|
|
Arizona
|
SB 1232 amended Arizona's
disability discrimination laws so as to conform with the federal definition
of disability, as amended by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments
Act. The amended law:
- makes it an unlawful employment practice discriminate
"on the basis of disability;"
- provides interpretations for "disability"
and "substantially limits;"
- defines the following terms: "auxiliary aids and
services," "being regarded as having such a physical or mental
impairment," "major life activities" and "discriminated
against;"
- addresses claims of no disability; and
- sets forth when reasonable accommodations or
modifications are not required.
Click here to learn more.
Source: Littler Mendelson
| | |
Colorado
|
Colorado amended its health
care-related provisions to permit health insurance carriers to offer
incentives for participating in a wellness program based on satisfying
standards related to a health risk factor, if the incentive is consistent
with federal nondiscrimination requirements. Though incentives can be
offered, participation cannot be required, nor can the incentive exceed 20
percent of the cost of employee-only coverage under the plan. Moreover, the
incentive must be reasonably related to the wellness program and the program
must not be overly burdensome or a subterfuge for discriminating based on a
health factor.
Click here to learn more.
Source: Littler Mendelson
| | |
Connecticut
|
On May 5, 2010, Connecticut
Gov. Jodi Rell signed into law HB 5204, known as "An Act Implementing
the Recommendations of the Joint Enforcement Commission on Employee Misclassification."
The new law increases the state's civil penalty for independent contractor
misclassification from the current $300 per violation to $300 per day per
violation. It also expands criminal liability for employers who knowingly
misclassify workers with the intent to injure, defraud or deceive the state
because of their failure to pay workers' compensation or second injury fund
assessments. The new law is scheduled to become effective on Oct. 1, 2010.
Nothing in the legislation reconciles the conflicting interpretations of
independent contractor status that exist under state and federal law.
Click here to learn more.
Source: Littler Mendelson
| | |
District of Columbia
|
In a 5-4 vote, the D.C.
Court of Appeals effectively upheld same-sex marriage on July 15, 2010. After
the D.C. Council approved same-sex marriage in December 2009, same-sex
marriage opponents (led by Bishop Harry Jackson) requested that the matter be
sent to the voters through a referendum. The D.C. Board of Elections and
Ethics rejected the request, and a District Superior Court judge upheld the
Board's decision in January. The Appeals Court agreed, finding that the Board
correctly decided that the proposed referendum would have authorized
discrimination prohibited by the district's Human Rights Act. Interestingly,
even the judges who dissented due to an argument that the Board may not have
acted within its guidelines in denying the referendum request, found that
discrimination prohibited by the Human's Right Act would have resulted if the
vote had been against same-sex marriage. Bishop Jackson has announced his
intention to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Click here to learn more.
Source: Littler Mendelson
| | |
Indiana
|
Effective July 1, 2010, HB
1086 states that if an employer or any person or entity acting on behalf of
an employer files more than 25 Form W-2 federal income tax withholding
statements with the Indiana Department of State Revenue in a calendar year,
they must be filed electronically.
This new law applies to Form
W-2 federal income tax withholding statements and Form WH-3 annual
withholding tax reports that are filed with the Department after Dec. 31,
2010.
Click here to learn more.
| | |
Louisiana
|
Effective Aug.15, 2010, SB
135 requires insurance carriers to provide current policy year utilization
data and paid claims data to group policyholders within 14 days of request
from the employer. The requirement applies to group health plans with more than
100 enrolled employees and the request must be made at least 80 days prior to
the renewal date. Additionally, the carrier must provide the employer with
the next policy year's premium rate information at least 90 days prior to
renewal.
Click here to learn more.
HB 1247 prohibits any health
plan offered through a state exchange to provide coverage for abortion
services.
Click here to learn more.
| | |
Minnesota
|
On May 25, 2010, Gov.
Pawlenty signed SF 2839 into law. The law includes two provisions impacting
group health plans. Upon termination of employment, an employer must notify
eligible employees of their right to continue coverage through state
continuation. The notice must be sent within 14 days after termination, which
is a change from the previous 10-day notification period.
Click here to learn more.
| | |
Mississippi
|
Mississippi has a new
security breach notification statute. Pursuant to the new law, a business
that owns, licenses or maintains personal information of any Mississippi
resident and which experiences a security breach, or has reason to believe
one occurred, must, without unreasonable delay, provide notice to all
affected individuals, and to the owner or licensee of the information, if
applicable. Personal information includes a person's first name or first
initial and last name, in combination with any one of the following: (1)
Social Security number; (2) driver's license number or state identification
card number; or (3) account, credit or debit card number and any accompanying
security code or password that would permit access to an individual's
financial account.
Notice may be provided in
writing, by telephone, electronically (if that is the primary means of
communicating with affected individuals or if the notice is consistent with
the federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act), or by
substitute notice under certain circumstances. Notification is not required
if, after an appropriate investigation, it is reasonably determined that the
breach will not likely result in harm to the affected individuals. Entities
that maintain such a procedure because of a federal mandate (for example, HIPAA),
will be compliant if notice is provided according to regulation.
Click here to learn more.
Source: Littler Mendelson
| | |
Missouri
|
Under current law, health
insurance policies are prohibited from providing coverage for elective
abortions except through optional riders. SB 793 extends this practice by
prohibiting health insurance policies offered through any health insurance
exchange established in Missouri or any federal health insurance exchange
administered within Missouri from providing coverage for elective abortions.
Click here to learn more.
SB 583 requires health
policies to cover adopted children in the same manner as other dependents are
covered.
Click here to learn more.
| | |
New Hampshire
|
Small employers who do not
sponsor a group health plan have the opportunity to maintain a premium-only
plan in which employees would purchase small group health coverage on an
individual basis through payroll deductions. Small employers are defined as
those with two to 50 employees. Under federal law, an employer could still be
considered the sponsor of the individual coverage. Thus, it is advised that
an employer consult with an attorney before implementing.
Click here to learn more.
Gov. John Lynch signed SB
455 into law on July 1, 2010. The Act revises state laws regarding dependent
coverage for adult children to conform to federal law under the PPACA.
Previously, New Hampshire defined a "dependent child" for purposes
of health coverage as an unmarried child by blood or by law who was either
(1) under 19; (2) under 25, if enrolled as a full-time student; or (3) under
age 26, if a resident of New Hampshire and not eligible under another health
plan. Effective Sept. 23, 2010, New Hampshire law will define a
"dependent child" as a subscriber's child by blood or by law who is
under age 26. It is important to note that New Hampshire's new law makes no
reference to the clause in the PPACA that allows grandfathered group health
plans to exclude coverage for an adult child below age 26 if he or she is
eligible to enroll in an employer-sponsored health plan for plan years
beginning on or before Jan. 1, 2014.
Click here to learn more.
Source: Littler Mendelson
| | |
North Carolina
|
North Carolina implemented a
state Long-Term Care Partnership Program. Qualified long-term care insurance
policies are designed to comply with the federal Long-Term Care Partnership
Program. A qualified policy must be accompanied by a Partnership Disclosure
Notice explaining the benefits in at least 12 point font. The model language
for the notice is included in SB 1193.
Click here to learn more.
| | |
Rhode Island
|
SB 2629, effective June 12,
2010, provides that dental and vision benefits be included for individuals
eligible for extended medical benefits under the state's continuation of
coverage provisions that currently apply to those who are covered under fully
insured medical plans and involuntarily laid off, deceased, terminated
through a reduction in force, or if the workplace ceased to exist.
Click here to learn more.
HB 8198, effective June 25,
2010, provides continued insurance coverage during an employee's extended
medical leave. To be eligible, the employee must have been employed on a
full-time basis for at least three months prior to the leave, and be an
insured member of a group hospital, surgical or medical insurance plan. If
the employee is placed on extended medical leave by the employer, the
employee may remain on the insurance plan for up to 18 months.
The employer may continue to
contribute to the cost of the plan or may require the employee to pay up to
100 percent of the cost. After the 18-month period is over, the employee will
be treated as if they were involuntarily terminated for purposes of
continuation coverage under state mini-cobra or federal COBRA law.
Medical leave applies to the
employee or the need to care for the employee's parent, child, step-child,
spouse, sibling or a person for whom the employee serves as a legal guardian.
Click here to learn more.
| | |
Virginia
|
HB 548, effective July 1,
2010, amended Virginia's health laws to permit group health insurance
policies to offer a premium discount to employers instituting and maintaining
employee wellness programs that satisfy insurer criteria. Additionally, the
law permits employers to require employees to undergo a health assessment if
the employee wishes to enroll in the wellness program.
Click here to learn more.
|
|
|
Sincerely,
D|A FINANCIAL GROUP3470
Mt. Diablo Boulevard, Suite A100 Lafayette,
CA 94549 (925) 254-7100 D|A Century Insurance Services, Inc. License No. 0606857 AXIA Employee Benefits Insurance Services, Inc. License No. 0C79854 Named one
of the Bay Area's "Best Places to
Work" by the San Francisco Business Times! Securities
& advisory services offered through NFP Securities, Inc. A Broker/Dealer
Member NASD/SPIC, A Federally Registered Investment Advisor Privacy Notice:
This material is intended only for the use of the individual to whom or the
entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone
and please delete the original message.
Circular 230 Disclosure: To comply with regulations issued by the IRS concerning the
provision of written advice regarding issues that concern or relate to federal
tax liability, we are required to provide to you the following disclosure:
Unless otherwise expressly reflected herein, any advice contained in this
document (or any attachment to this document) that concerns federal tax issues
is not written, offered or intended to be used, and cannot be used, by anyone
for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties that may be imposed by the
IRS or promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any matters
addressed in this document or any attachment. |
This material was created by NFP, its subsidiaries, or affiliates for distribution by their Registered Representatives, Investment Advisor Representatives, and/or Agents. This material was created to provide accurate and reliable information on the subjects covered. It is not intended to provide specific legal, tax or other professional advice. The services of an appropriate professional should be sought regarding your individual situation. Neither NFP Securities, Inc. nor NFP Benefits Partners offer legal or tax services. The information contained in this edition is issued for informational purposes only and has been collected from regulations, statutes, laws, court decisions and administrative rulings and should not be viewed as interpretation or relied upon as legal or tax advice. This information is known to be current as of the initial date of distribution. Please note that changes to the legislation, regulations, statutes, policies, etc., may have occurred and are not reflected herein.
Securities offered through Registered Representatives of NFP Securities, Inc., a Broker/Dealer and Member FINRA/SIPC. Investment Advisory Services offered through Investment Advisory Representatives of NFP Securities, Inc. a Federally Registered Investment Adviser. NFP Benefits Partners is a division of NFP Insurance Services, Inc., which is a subsidiary of National Financial Partners Corp, the parent company of NFP Securities, Inc. National Financial Partners Corp. (NFP) and its subsidiaries may or may not be affiliated with the firm listed as the primary contact on this material. Please refer to their disclosure for their relationship, if any, with NFP and its subsidiaries.
Not all of the individuals using this material are registered to offer Securities or Investment Advisory services through NFP Securities, Inc
Notice: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, privileged, legally privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please accept this as notice that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information contained in this transmission is strictly prohibited. National Financial Partners Corp. reserves the right, to the extent and under circumstances permitted by applicable law, to retain, monitor and intercept e-mail messages to and from its systems.
Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and do not necessarily express those of National Financial Partners Corp. Although this transmission and any attachment are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by NFP, its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately contact the sender by return e-mail or by telephone at 212-301-4000 and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy format. |
|
|
|