On June 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in King v. Burwell that individual taxpayers who enroll in health plans through the federal government's health insurance exchange can be eligible for federal tax credits under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).1
The Supreme Court's decision means that large employers should continue to comply with the ACA. The Burwell decision also effectively eliminates the hopes of many employers that a large portion of the ACA's provisions affecting employers would be repealed or delayed by the Supreme Court.
Background
As of January 1, 2015, the ACA generally requires large employers2 to offer a minimum level of group health coverage that is affordable to full-time employees. This is often referred to as the "employer shared responsibility mandate." A large employer must self-report compliance with the mandate to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) after the end of a calendar year. If a large employer does not offer the required level of health coverage, the IRS may impose various tax penalties on the employer if a full-time employee receives a federal tax credit for coverage received through an insurance exchange.3
The Burwell Case
In Burwell, the Supreme Court examined whether the ACA allows federal tax credits to individuals (1) in every state, or (2) only in those states that have established their own health insurance exchange.4 The plaintiffs in Burwell argued that federal tax credits are only available to a health insurance exchange operated by a state government.5
In total, 34 states did not elect to establish state-operated exchanges under the ACA. Many economists predicted a potential collapse of the ACA if the Supreme Court sided with the plaintiffs in Burwell because in the states without state-operated exchanges: (1) tax credits would be denied to low- and moderate-income individuals, which would undermine a major goal of the ACA in a meaningful way, and (2) the IRS may not have been able to impose penalty taxes in all instances on employers for failing to offer health insurance coverage.
In a 6-3 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court found that the state exchange requirement of the ACA, when read in the context of the entire ACA and its purpose, leads to the conclusion that the U.S. Congress did not intend to limit federal tax credits only to individuals in states that established their own health insurance exchanges.6 Thus, individuals who purchase health insurance through a federally facilitated exchange or state-operated health exchange may qualify for federal tax credits under the ACA.
In the end, the Supreme Court's decision means that large employers should continue to comply with the employer shared responsibility mandate and prepare for the administrative burdens of reporting compliance with the mandate to the IRS.
Key Action Items for Employers
-
Consider the ACA's minimum health coverage rules in the design of group health plan terms regarding eligibility and benefits.
-
Assess, if not done so already, whether the company qualifies as a large employer under the ACA.
-
If the company qualifies as a large employer under the ACA, then:
-
Evaluate compliance with the employer shared responsibility mandate, including whether the company offers qualifying coverage to the proper number of full-time employees.
-
Prepare to report (on IRS Forms 1094 and 1095, as applicable) compliance with the employer shared responsibility mandate in early 2016.