HHS is holding firm on its position regarding the embedded individual out-of-pocket maximum, even though many have questioned whether this position is consistent with the clear language of the statute. Reports indicate that in a recent letter to members of the National Coalition on Benefits, HHS reinforces that, beginning in 2016, consistent with guidance issued in May (at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq-aca27.html), group health plans, including self-insured plans and grandfathered plans, must cover a participant’s expenses at 100% once that individual reaches the individual out-of-pocket maximum ($6,850, in 2016). This applies regardless of what tier of coverage in which the individual is enrolled (employee plus one, employee and children, family, etc.). This rule also applies to high deductible health plans, which is not a violation of the HDHP tax code requirements. Prior to this rule, high deductible health plans provided that benefits were payable at 100% only after the entire family satisfied the family OOP maximum. Employers should review their plans, particularly any high deductible health plans, to confirm that the plan contains an embedded OOP maximum for individuals, regardless of coverage tier, beginning in 2016.
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.