Saw this in a trade journal. You have to register, so I will try to summarize.
Under ACA (Obamacare), the employee premium cost for the lowest cost plan offered for group health insurance must meet affordability guidelines. In 2021, that number is 9.83% of the employee's household income. (This number is adjusted each year and safe harbors apply but that is a different conversation. )
Under current ACA rules any premium surcharge for opting not to be vaxxed COULD be applied to the cost of the employer's lowest cost plan. IF that surcharge renders the plan as unaffordable and the employee goes to the exchanges and receives a premium tax credit, the employer can then be subject to ACA's Penalty B.
Example: a company with 5000 employees offers coverage to full time employees but as a result of surcharges, the coverage now doesn't provide minimum value and/or is also unaffordable and 100 of those employees are forced to go out to the exchanges. Those employees are now receiving a premium tax credit or subsidy. In 2021, the penalties for this violation are $4060 per employee. The employer who may have stuck a $100 surcharge to the unvaxxed employees may now have a penalty of $406,000.
Keep in mind that the ACA definition for large employer means 50 or more full time employees. Also, I have to think household income is all over the map at this point as a result of lockdowns.
Unlike the exception for tobacco, nothing in the current ACA rules allows for a surcharge. This could always change, but until then, this is something in your arsenal if you are getting pressure. It could be something as simple as 'I sure hope the fines aren't too bad for your Obamacare violations this year.' Trust me, HR does not like to go back to their leadership with news of these little surprises.
(And it would be ironic if it was Obamacare rules that tripped people up.)
Glorious irony of Obamacare saving the day from coercion to vax by an employer.
Interesting. If 100 of those employees (I'm assuming they refuse to get vaxxed) are forced to go out to the exchanges wouldn't the employer fire them to avoid having to pay the penalties? So, how would it serve any of these 100 employees to say anything at all if their jobs could be on the line?
That could be a possibility, but then I think you get into the other issues surrounding this - discrimination, at will employment depending on where you live/work and that is above my pay grade.
The ACA issue I think it is more a matter of unintended consequences. Health care compliance is tricky stuff. Not all companies have an HR department that is well versed in this - lot if times it is someone who is wearing multiple hats, hiring, payroll, etc., so they lean on their insurance brokers. But not all employee benefits firms have compliance officers on staff either. There are a lot of businesses, large and small, who do stuff and only after the fact get around to mentioning it. I can't tell you how many clients have moved on me and neglected to mention it and then wonder where the bill is. Lot of it is just plain old communication.
Thanks for the response. I'm not well versed in this subject, but I am in regards to the 'love of money being the root of all evil'. In the preponderance of cases it always this ancient axiom bearing fruit. It's only the exception that counter it. A long time ago I came to believe corporate state is mystery Babylon. It is the almighty profit that dictates all things.
Good info!