ERIC Outlines Suggestions for Reducing Regulatory Burdens

April 29, 2011 (PLANSPONSOR.com) - The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) urged the Treasury Department to be more responsive to easing the regulatory burden on sponsors of benefit plans in order to ensure that companies continue to provide health and retirement benefits.

 

ERIC also offered the ongoing experience of ERIC members who sponsor cash balance and other hybrid pensions plans as an example of the adverse consequences that misguided regulations can have.

“The Pension Protection Act of 2006 reflected a clear policy in favor of establishing and maintaining hybrid plans that provide meaningful and secure retirement benefits.  However, almost five years have passed, and Treasury and the IRS still have not issued definitive guidance on fundamental issues; and proposed regulations have introduced new stumbling blocks that are inconsistent with Congress’s intent,” said ERIC President Mark Ugoretz. 

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

ERIC provided the suggestion as part of comments it submitted to the Department of Treasury in response to a Request for Information (RFI) as part of President Obama’s January 18 Executive Order on ways the Department could reduce the burden associated with its regulations.

ERIC’s letter adds that “[t]he current regulatory climate, particularly with regard to hybrid plans, offers very little incentive to maintain a defined benefit plan in any form, and actually imposes significant disincentives.”   

In addition, ERIC said that overly burdensome regulations under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) and other laws affecting employee benefit plans can have similar adverse consequences and that it is critical to “choose the least burdensome path,” as outlined in the Executive Order.

ERIC recommends creating one or more stakeholder advisory groups such as the Information Reporting Program Advisory Committee (IRPAC) to review regulations affecting employee benefit plans, and to discuss issues and proposed solutions with Treasury and IRS officials. 

Specifically, in the areas of electronic disclosure, qualified plans, group health benefits, and executive compensation, ERIC offered the following recommendations:

  • Permit electronic disclosure without affirmative consent since it is not practical for large employers to obtain, store, and administer electronic consents from tens of thousands of workers, retirees, alternate payees, and others.  ERIC adds that Treasury should jointly work with the Department of Labor (DOL) to ensure that the requirements are no less burdensome that the updated requirements under DOL’s electronic disclosure initiative. 
  • Allow employers to provide the required notice of benefit restrictions under Internal Revenue Code section 436 a reasonable time before the restrictions become applicable.  ERIC argues that many employers know in advance that the restrictions will apply, and wish to provide notice in advance when the information is most useful to affected participants, such as at any time during a window that opens a reasonable time (e.g., 90 days) before the restrictions become applicable and closes 30 days after the restrictions become applicable.
  • Revise the regulations under Internal Revenue Code section 401(a)(9) to allow acceleration of payment after the payment start date.  ERIC understands that certain restrictions might be necessary to prevent the use of increasing payments to circumvent the minimum distribution requirements, but argues that circumvention is not a concern when the initial form of payment complies with the requirements of the Code section.
  • Reduce the burden required to comply with the “relative value” regulations under Internal Revenue Code section 417(a)(3).  ERIC argues that the level of detail required under the regulation is a trap for the unwary and is of limited utility to participants, particularly where the plan offers a large number of option forms of payment.
  • Reduce the level of detail required for notices under Internal Revenue Code section 4980F and ERISA section 204(h), and allow use of interactive modeling tools.  ERIC argues that the regulations should be revisited to allow more simple disclosure, with a simplified form for amendments that allow participants to choose between the old benefit formula and the new formula, and allow shorter notices that describe in simple terms the provisions that are changing.
  • Coordinate regulations affecting workplace wellness programs under Title I and II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), noting that employers are reluctant to invest additional time and money in developing wellness programs until the applicable law is clarified, and gives effect to the intent of Congress and the Administration to support workplace wellness programs.
  • Coordinate the ACA preventive services regulation with the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act regulations, so that a plan does not become subject to the MHPAEA merely because it provides benefits required by the preventive service regulation.
  • Revise the regulations under Internal Revenue Code section 409A to address practical concerns, particularly with respect to benefits payable upon death, disability, or an involuntary separation from service.

ERIC’s comment letter can be accessed at http://www.eric.org/forms/uploadFiles/28B7C00000005.filename.ERIC_Response_to_Treasury_Regulatory_Burden_RFI_042911.pdf.

Recession Leads to Record Drop in Workplace Health Coverage: EBRI

April 29, 2011 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – The Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) reports that the percentage of workers who received employment-based health benefits through their jobs suffered a 2.4% decline between 2008 and 2009. 

 

That percentage decreased from 53.2% in 2008 to 52% in 2009, according to the report.  The data also show that during the recession the percentage of workers with coverage as a dependent fell from 17% in 2008 to 16.3% in 2009, a 4.5% drop.   

EBRI noted that 2009 marked both the sharpest one-year decline in employment-based health coverage for working age Americans, and also the first time in recent history that less than 60% of individuals under age 65 had health benefits through a job.  The analysis uses data from 2008 and 2009 that were collected in the March 2009 and March 2010 Current Population Survey following the 2007−2009 recession. 

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANSPONSOR NEWSDash daily newsletter.

Paul Fronstin, director of EBRI’s Health Research and Education Program and author of the report, notes that unemployment and health coverage are strongly related: When the employment rate falls, health coverage also falls as jobs—and the health benefits that come with them—are lost.    

The study found the decline in coverage corresponded with the rising unemployment rate during the recession, from an average of 5.8% in 2008 to 9.3% in 2009, and a high of 10.1% during 2009. 

Fewer Offered Coverage 

The EBRI report also noted that fewer employers offered coverage, which means that fewer workers have access to coverage, and workers’ wages are not keeping pace with health care premiums, meaning fewer workers with access to coverage are likely to enroll in health plans. Structural changes in the work force, such as the movement of workers away from manufacturing jobs and from full-time and full-year work, also contributed to the decline, according to the report, which appears in the April 2011 EBRI Issue Brief, “The Impact of the 2007−2009 Recession on Workers’ Health Coverage.” 

“As we start to examine the data from 2010, we will be able to determine whether the economic recovery has started to have an effect on health benefits among workers who lost coverage during the recession,” Fronstin said.  

The report notes that the decline in health coverage affected different groups in different ways. Among the other findings: 

Workers with a high school education or less experienced a statistically significant decline in the likelihood of having coverage. The percentage of workers with less than a high school education who had health coverage through their job fell from 27.5% to 25.6% between 2008 and 2009, and among those with a high school education, the percentage with coverage through their job slipped from 50.2% to 48.4%.  However, neither workers with a college degree nor those with a graduate degree experienced a statistically significant decline in coverage through their own jobs, according to the report. 

Workers of all races experienced what EBRI termed “statistically significant” declines in coverage between 2008 and 2009, according to the report.  . The likelihood that non-Hispanic whites had coverage through their own job fell from 56.2% to 55.2%, while among non-Hispanic blacks, the percentage with coverage fell from 53.5% to 51.9%  Among Hispanics of all races, the percentage with coverage through their own job fell from 39.5% to 36.9%. 

EBRI noted that both men and women also experienced a statistically significant decline in the percentage with health coverage through their own job; the percentage of men with coverage through their own job fell from 56.2% to 54.3%, while the percentage of women with coverage through their own job slipped from 50.1% to 49.5%. 

Workers in nearly all age cohorts experienced a statistically significant decline in the percentage with health coverage through their own job, with the exception of those ages 18−20 and 55−64.  While the youngest workers did not experience a statistically significant decline in coverage (they were the least likely age cohort to have coverage through their own job), neither did the cohort that included workers aged 55-64, though they were the most likely age cohort to have coverage through their own job. 

«