| Employer Impact and Understanding | | | | Legislative leaders believed legislative intent was to |
| Businesses will be affected by reform in a number of | | | | take into consideration part-time employees or full-time |
| direct and indirect ways. Direct requirements include: | | | | equivalents and that employers´contribution should be |
| fair share assessments contributions, efforts to extend | | | | more on the magnitude of 50%. |
| tax deductibility to more employees, reporting | | | | Section 125 Plans |
| requirements, and new antidiscrimination provisions. | | | | Reform legislation required businesses with more than |
| Indirectly, as the individual mandate kicks in, employers | | | | 10 employees to establish Section 125 cafeteria plans. |
| may experience a jump in the number of employees | | | | These plans would enable insurance premiums to be |
| enrolling in company-sponsored coverage. This may | | | | deducted from employee wages on a pretax basis. |
| significantly increase costs and may have a great | | | | This money is not subject to federal, state, or Social |
| economic impact. Further, reform sets minimum | | | | Security taxes. It will result in significant savings for |
| coverage levels that all people will need to have to | | | | employees and also reduce the payroll taxes |
| satisfy the mandate. Employers that currently do not | | | | businesses have to pay. |
| provide insurance that meets this standard may want | | | | Health Insurance Responsibility Disclosure Forms |
| to adjust coverage to meet this standard. | | | | The Division of Health Care Finance and Policy held |
| Employer awareness and response will be critical to | | | | hearings on draft regulations regarding the information |
| the future success of reform. | | | | that would be required from employers with respect to |
| Fair Share Assessment | | | | employee coverage. Regulations were subsequently |
| Companies with 11 or more employees that do not | | | | with drawn, in part, because of concern about the |
| make a "fair and reasonable" contribution to their | | | | magnitude of information required. |
| employees´ health insurance will be assessed a fee | | | | Non-Discrimination Rules |
| per uninsured employee. This provision broke a major | | | | Nondiscrimination rules will effectively require |
| logjam over what employer responsibility should be. | | | | employers to provide the same benefits and make the |
| The state Division of Health Care Finance defined fair | | | | same contribution to all full-time employees. Employers |
| and reasonable as having a minimum of 25% of a | | | | will not be able to pay more of the health insurance |
| company´s full-time employees enrolled in their health | | | | costs for employees making higher wages. Specifically, |
| plan or paying at least 33% of employees´ premium. | | | | it prohibits health plans from contracting with employers |
| Full time was defined as 35 or more hours a week. | | | | that do not make their products available to all full-time |
| Consumer groups, labor, and key legislators objected | | | | employees and that do not make a similar contribution |
| that these regulations were too narrowly configured. | | | | to all company enrollees. |