Question: We're planning to
eliminate coverage for spouses and dependent children under our
company's group health plan. Do we need to offer COBRA to
spouses and dependent children who are covered at the time we amend
Answer: Under these circumstances, you
aren't required to offer COBRA to spouses. However, you may
have to do so for dependent children. A COBRA qualifying event
requires a loss of coverage caused by one of the triggering events
listed in the statute.
For spouses, the triggering events include the covered
Termination of employment
Reduction of hours
Death, divorce or legal
Entitlement to Medicare
"Termination or amendment of the group health plan"
isn't a listed triggering event, so spouses will have no COBRA
event, even though they'll lose coverage when your plan is
For dependent children, the answer isn't so clear. Under the
statute, "a dependent child ceasing to be a dependent under
the generally applicable requirements of the plan" is a COBRA
triggering event. When you amend your group health plan to
eliminate coverage for dependent children, the children will cease
to be eligible dependent children under the plan and, thus, may
have a COBRA qualifying event.
On the other hand, if eligibility for all dependent children is
eliminated, there are no "generally applicable
requirements" with respect to these children. Arguably, a
triggering event involving loss of dependent status can occur only
when there's a change in the circumstances of a particular
dependent with respect to his or her eligibility for otherwise
Due to the unclear statutory requirement, employers and plan
administrators should obtain legal advice and consult with any
insurers (including stop-loss insurers) before deciding whether to
offer COBRA to dependent children who lose coverage because of a
plan amendment. Although the most conservative approach would
appear to be to offer COBRA to the dependent children, insured
plans risk having to self-insure such coverage unless the insurer
agrees in advance that COBRA is appropriate for these
One further caution, if you're an employer subject to the
Affordable Care Act's shared responsibility requirements
(otherwise known as the "play or pay" provision), a plan
design that excludes dependent children may not be recommended.
Under the law, coverage must be offered to full-time employees'
children (defined, for this purpose, as children under age 26, but
not including foster children or stepchildren) in order to avoid
potential penalties under Internal Revenue Code Section 4980H.
Clearly, there are a variety of complexities to determining
whether you must provide COBRA coverage to dependents no longer
covered under your plan. As mentioned, be sure to work closely with
your benefits advisors to ensure you're on safe ground.
If you have questions about COBRA, please contact Ron
Present, Partner and Health Care Industry Group Leader, at
firstname.lastname@example.org or 314.983.1358.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Remember how Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470 (1996), dismissed the §510k "substantially equivalence" medical device clearance as non-preemptive because it was supposedly "focused on equivalence, not safety"? Id. at 493.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) related portions of the 21st Century Cares Act, found in title III, establish a streamlined process for the exemption of certain Class I and II devices from the premarket notification requirement and allow for the establishment of revised regulatory standards for accessories to high-risk devices.
Hospitals are commonly named as defendants in medical malpractice lawsuits for claims arising from alleged injuries within their walls, but what is their exposure to liability for claims that arise from alleged sexual assaults by staff on their premises?
Eric Fader was quoted in a November 9 article, "Incoming Trump Administration May Mean Less Funding for HIPAA Audits," in Bloomberg BNA's Health Care Fraud Report. Eric said that the incoming Trump administration may eventually be forced to reduce funding for some healthcare initiatives to pay for other priorities, such as large tax cuts and increased spending on the military.
Title III of the 21st Century Cures Act includes portions of the FDA Device Accountability Act of 2015, Promoting Biomedical Research and Public Health for Patients Act, and FDA and NIH Workforce Authorities Modernization Act.
A February 2 article in Bloomberg BNA's Privacy Law Watch and other publications, "Hospital Hit With $3.2M Penalty for Ongoing Health Data Security Lapses," reported that Children's Medical Center of Dallas received a $3.2 million civil money penalty after years of noncompliance with HIPAA rules and after failing to request a hearing on the penalty.
The 21st Century Cures Act includes portions of the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Reform Act of 2016, which was approved by the US House of Representatives in July 2016, but not advanced by the Senate.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).