March 31 was the first deadline relating to the IRS reporting of the employer shared responsibility provisions under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) and a quiet April was likely a welcome relief.
The IRS has also added filing errors relating to Form 5500 to its project list, and multiple federal agencies confirmed that the just-announced templates relating to the Summary of Benefits and Coverage will not go into effect until the first day of the first plan year beginning on or after April 1, 2017.
COBRA is still going strong. And while the general rule of COBRA is not necessarily that difficult to understand, the time frames, notice requirements, intricacies, and the ways in which COBRA interacts with other laws presents employers with potentially extremely expensive outcomes.
Traditionally speaking, employee “wellness” programs have primarily focused on just physical health. Whereas employee “well-being” programs emphasize emotional, mental, social, and financial health in addition to physical health.
According to the IRS, identity theft has been the number one consumer complaint to the Federal Trade Commission for 15 consecutive years. The Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that 17.6 million people were victims of identity theft in 2014.
When a company is audited, the auditor sent by the DOL will vary in his or her experience of conducting audits. If the person is a novice, then that often means the auditor might ask for more information, whereas someone more experienced knows exactly what they want.
Not many things incite more fear than receiving a notice that you’re about to have an audit, especially from the Department of Labor (DOL).
Many smaller companies simply don’t have the bandwidth to get them completed. The CEO of a ten-person company is most likely also the HR Manager, CFO, and buyer of office supplies.
An IRS plan audit uniquely focuses an employer’s mind on the core identity of its qualified retirement plan, which is that of a tax exempt organization, but one whose exemption (or “qualification”) requirements are far pickier than those applicable to one’s favorite charity.
From 2013 to 2015, a series of Supreme Court cases and government updates have changed the landscape of the way employers must consider same-sex spouses in relation to employee benefits.