Professional Services Exclusion Applies to Bar Coverage For Investment Management Firm
By Thomas Hanekamp, Esq. of Tressler LLP
Policyholders assert, sometimes successfully, that courts should parse the underlying allegations of complaints and find a defense is owed, or reimbursement of defense costs is owed, where a single allegation establishes a potentially covered claim. Where this fails, as it should, is where the context of the allegation is disregarded and the policyholder advances a strained and contorted view of the pleading. A recent well-reasoned decision from the District of Columbia provides some guidance on these issues adopting a common sense approach that is loyal to the contractual language to which the parties agreed. A copy of the decision can be accessed here.
By Joy Napier-Joyce, Esq, and Melissa Ostrower, Esq. of Jackson Lewis P.C.
Key points:
- Employers should utilize the revised model notices
- Employers should be proactive in communicating with employees about "Marketplace" coverage
- Employers may want to notify affected individuals of special enrollment rights
Employers Beware: A New Statement on Obamacare Rulings from the IRS
By Aaron Peterson, Editor Agents Advantage
The IRS recently published a ruling that clarifies that when an employer does not establish a health insurance plan for its own employees, but instead chooses to reimburse those employees for premiums they pay for health insurance either inside or outside the Exchange ("Marketplace"), such an arrangement constitutes an "employer payment plan." http://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Employer-Health-Care-Arrangements These arrangements fail to satisfy the Affordable Care Act. The ruling comes as a blow to many employers who gave their workers tax-free cash contributions to purchase coverage or include reimbursement plans such as health reimbursement arrangements. Employers have to consider the ACA market reform with rulings on annual dollar limit prohibitions which state annual limits are the total benefits an insurance company will pay in a year while an individual is enrolled in a particular health insurance plan. Starting in 2014, the Affordable Care Act bans annual dollar limits.
Evolving International Regulations on Client Data Put More Pressure on Accounting Firms
By William J. Kelly, Esq. of Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
The world may be getting smaller, but the number of ways various countries approach confidentiality is growing. A mosaic of disparate regulations should give any auditor or accountant pause when providing services for clients that have operations across international borders. What may be sufficient client data protection in one country may not be in another. What may be common data handling in one country may be a crime in another. To complicate matters, the regulatory landscape is consistently evolving, thrusting more duties and obligations on accountants than ever before. A firm with international clientele would best be served by identifying those jurisdictions in which it has clients and assessing the impact of the applicable confidentiality and data protection laws.
Decision Holding Telecommuting to Be a Reasonable Accommodation Provides a Cautionary Tale for Employers
By Caroline J. Berdzik, Esq., Sean P. Beiter, Esq. and Matthew C. Van Vessem, Esq. of Goldberg Segalla LLP
In a 2-1 decision, the Sixth Circuit in EEOC v. Ford Motor Co., No. 12-2484 (6th Cir. April 22, 2014) has dealt employers a blow regarding the extent to which a company must reasonably accommodate an employee with a disability. In this particular case, the employee sought a four-day-per-week telecommuting arrangement. Even though Ford found in its business judgment that this was not a workable arrangement, the court disagreed, noting that due to modern technology, the types of jobs where employees can fulfill all essential requirements while working remotely has significantly increased.
|