Concentrating on corporate law, financial and real estate transactions, and litigation, Clark Hill Thorp Reed attorneys deliver expertise in multiple practice areas and industries. Our reputation is grounded in the highest ethical standards and strongest commitment to client service. In a world of increasing complexity, Clark Hill Thorp Reed provides confident and sure counsel. Our multidisciplinary approach means working hard and working smart on our clients’ behalf to provide innovative and cost-effective solutions to legal problems.
The United States healthcare industry is the largest in the world. Faced with the challenge of ever-increasing medical costs, healthcare, pharmaceutical, medical device companies seek to provide affordable services that benefit consumers, add value for shareholders, and increase the overall health of the nation. Clark Hill Thorp Reed offers comprehensive representation to our healthcare clients, drawing on our Corporate, Litigation, Insurance, and Commercial Finance practices. We have been a leader in providing legal services to our clients that include integrated health systems and networks, hospitals, academic medical centers, managed care organizations (PPOs and HMOs), long-term care facilities, health and disability insurers, physicians and physician organizations, and ancillary service and medical equipment providers. Clark Hill Thorp Reed’s experience includes general corporate matters, regulatory compliance and corporate compliance programs, system and network development, managed care contracting and administration, medical staff organization and bylaws, third-party billing and claims management, managed care and insurance law, defense of federal claims, policy development, labor and employment issues, antitrust law, information technology and operational issues.
Since the Affordable Care Act (“Act”) became law in March of 2010, the question we benefits attorneys are most often asked is, “Don’t you think health care reform is going to go away (be repealed) (be ruled unconstitutional)?” We consistently have answered “no.” And despite the opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued on August 12, 2011, our answer stays the same.
For now, President Obama’s decision not to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) should not affect how employers administer their employee benefit plans. This Communiqué explains the President’s decision and its impact on employer-sponsored plans.
Health care reform creates new challenges for plan sponsors. They may face significant excise tax penalties for noncompliance, as well as participant claims under Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) enforcement rules. Modulating it all is the fact that the mandates are “people-friendly.” In the final analysis, every reader of this article is a person who may ultimately benefit when the time comes to be a consumer of care.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111-148), as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-152), combined, make up the law commonly referred to as Health Care Reform. This article refers to Health Care Reform as the Affordable Care Act or the ACA.
The Nov. 24 issue of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine included an article by Dr. David C. Ring, a surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital, that might have made defense counsel cringe. In the article, Ring vividly describes how a series of personal and systemic mistakes led him to operate on the wrong arm of a 65-year-old woman. Through this disclosure, Ring hoped that others would learn from and avoid his traumatic mistake.
In his Jan. 10 opinion piece, Professor Ronald Rotunda argues that "not buying [health] insurance, like not buying spinach, is not an economic act," and therefore the individual mandate is unconstitutional. Health care, however, is not spinach, and his analogy deserves a failing grade.
The Department of Labor has issued interim final regulations that must be followed in order for your plan to avoid a prohibited transaction. These rules only apply to retirement plans: both defined benefit and defined contribution plans (hereafter, “plan(s)”). They do not apply to a Simplified Employee Pension (“SEP”), a SIMPLE Plan, or an IRA, and also do not apply to welfare plans such as health, dental, vision, or disability plans.
Agencies Issue Interim Final Regulations Implementing Selected Health Reform Provisions
This is the seventh installment of our series on Health Care Reform, which discusses Interim Final Regulations issued by Health and Human Services, Treasury and the Department of Labor (“Agencies”), that appeared in the Federal Register on June 28, 2010 (“Interim Rules”).
TO BE OR NOT TO BE GRANDFATHERED – THAT IS THE QUESTION.
This is the sixth installment of our series on Health Care Reform. This installment discusses the grandfathered plan concept and Interim Final Regulations issued by Health and Human Services, Treasury and the Department of Labor, which appeared in the Federal Register on June 17, 2010.
Updated for Recent DOL/IRS/HHS Guidance
“Coming Soon to Your Health Care Plan: Coverage for Adult Children”
This is the fourth installment in our series on Health Care Reform. Continuing our effort to provide you with Health Care Reform in “small bites,” this particular communiqué will focus solely on the requirement under the Affordable Care Act to provide health care coverage to your employees’ adult children.
The COBRA subsidy has been extended a third time to cover involuntary terminations through May 31, 2010 with passage of the “Continuing Extension Act of 2010” (the “Act”).
Reducing the Cost of Health Care to “Early Retirees”
This third article in our series about Health Care Reform discusses a potential opportunity if you provide an “employment-based group health benefits plan” (“plan”) to retirees over age 55 that are not eligible for coverage under Medicare (an “early retiree”).
Tax Credit for Small Businesses – Including Certain Tax-Exempt Employers
As the second in a series of articles about Health Care Reform, this communiqué addresses the small business tax credit for “eligible small employers,” available for taxable years beginning on or after December 31, 2009.
This is the first in a series of articles that will focus on how the Reform Act impacts you as an employer.
As you know, with the passage of the Temporary Extension Act of 2010, eligibility for the 15 month COBRA subsidy was recently extended by Congress to cover involuntary terminations occurring through March 31, 2010.
The Act will extend eligibility for the 65% subsidy for COBRA premiums for qualifying events that constitute an involuntary termination through the end of March 31, 2010.
On December 21, 2009, President Obama signed the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010 (“DODAA”). Tagged on near the very end of DODAA is language that extends the COBRA subsidy under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”).
It has been a busy year for benefit professionals. During 2009 numerous new rules have been issued and/or gone into effect that may impact your benefit programs. Other rules require compliance by the end of 2009 or in 2010.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently published an interim final “breach notification” rule (HHS Rule), which clarifies several requirements of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH). The HHS Rule was developed in conjunction with the recent Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rule, which pertains to breaches by vendors of personal health records and certain other entities not covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
This is a follow-up to our previous communiqué discussing the new COBRA health care continuation requirements under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA” or “Stimulus Act”) which became law on February 17, 2009, and which made amendments to both the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Code”) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”).
While there are many labor and employment issues (and laws) to consider when planning a reduction in force ("RIF"), there are also employee benefit issues that should not be overlooked. If you are planning a RIF or considering voluntary or involuntary terminations, the employee benefit considerations will depend, in part, upon the types of employee benefit plans you currently maintain, the types of termination packages you decide to implement, and the nature of your workforce.
The Stimulus Act imposes new COBRA compliance obligations that are generally effective on March 1, 2009. (See the discussion titled “Grace Period” below.)
New SCHIP Law Results in Plan Amendments and a New Disclosure Requirement
As you may be aware, Section 409A (“409A”) addressing deferred compensation arrangements, was added to the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”) in 2004, but final regulations were not issued until April 2007. The law and final regulations make major changes in the tax treatment of many compensation practices and impose tougher standards for how compensation is promised and paid, as well as how it is taxed for federal income tax purposes.
Many commentators have offered opinions with respect to whether a recent amendment to Pennsylvania’s Physical Therapy Practice Act (the “PTPA”) impacts adversely the ability of a Doctor of Chiropractic (“DC”) to delegate massage or rehabilitative services to an unlicensed Chiropractic Assistant (“CA”).
