May 17, 2019


In This Issue
Fast Facts
Cadillac Tax Repeal Reaches Critical Milestone
Senate Bipartisan Working Group Proposes Baseball Style Arbitration to Settle Surprise Medical Billing Disputes
New Guidance Issued in Response to Association Health Plan Court Ruling
House Votes to Rescind Short-Term Plan Rule, Bolster ACA Support, Lower Drug Prices
Trump Administration Issues Final Rule on Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D
State Spotlight: Connecticut Joins Washington and Colorado in Considering Public Option Initiatives
Healthcare Happy Hour: Adding More Bills to the Hopper
Last Chance to Save on Annual Convention Registration
Register Now for the “Live from NAHU” Webinar on June 20
Did You Miss Yesterday’s Webinar on Form 5500 Reporting?
HUPAC Roundup: Defending Seats in Enemy Territory
What We’re Reading
E-mail the Editor
Visit the NAHU Website
Printer Friendly Version
New Guidance Issued in Response to Association Health Plan Court Ruling

The Department of Labor issued new guidance on Monday in response to the recent court ruling that invalidated the association health plan (AHP) final rule as a deliberate and illegal “end run” around the ACA. The newly released questions and answers document confirms that AHPs cannot market to or enroll new members, although previously-existing AHPs are allowed to continue to operate. This guidance follows an initial response by the administration in April confirming that state insurance departments continue to have the authority to oversee AHPs and that claims must be paid. Late last month, rather than rescinding or revising the rule, the Administration appealed the lower court’s decision to the D.C. Court of Appeals.

The rule had three staggered implementation periods: the first began on September 1, 2018, and allowed for any new or existing associations to establish a fully insured AHP; the second began on January 1 and allowed existing associations that sponsored an AHP on or after the date of the final rule to establish a self-funded AHP; and on April 1 all other associations (new or existing) were able to establish a self-funded AHP. Nearly three dozen AHPs have formed under the new rule, and roughly 4 million Americans had been expected to enroll in an AHP by 2023.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, was that these plans don’t meet the coverage rules of the ACA, and arguably violate ERISA. He specifically called out the direct violation of ERISA in the AHP rule’s attempt to change the definition of employer to allow an association to be formed for the sole purpose of offering health insurance – as long as one other service is provided to members – and to allow working owners with no employees to be counted as both the employer and employee in joining a group AHP. NAHU specifically raised our concerns with potential issues of conforming the AHP rule with ERISA as part of comments we submitted on the draft proposal last year.

Last month, more than two dozen Senate Republicans introduced legislation that would codify the expansion of AHPs into law. That legislation would establish in statute the new AHP pathways for small businesses so that they could continue to be offered. Without a legislative fix to the invalidated rule, all of the AHPs established under the Trump Administration rulemaking would have their legal status in jeopardy, unless the administration is able to release updated rules that are deemed permissible, or a higher court overrules the lower court and allows the plans to operate under the original regulation.

Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook
< Previous Article | Next Article >
NAHU on Twitter NAHU on Facebook NAHU on LinkedIn