7.31.14  

  Inside Health Insurance Exchanges  

 

Kara M. Maciel was quoted in an article titled "Restricting Subsidies to State Exchanges Is Unlikely, but Would Seriously Alter ACA."

 

An excerpt:

 

Dueling appeals court rulings issued July 22 once again call into question the legality of federally run exchanges distributing premium subsidies to enrollees. While some industry observers tell HEX it's unlikely the case will ever make it to the Supreme Court, others are certain that's where it's headed. A ruling that prevents federally run exchanges from distributing subsidies, they say, would effectively end both the employer and individual mandates, and could prompt insurance carriers to launch a new wave of low-cost coverage options.

 

The DC Circuit judges looked at the language in the statute and felt the language was clear and unambiguous, notes Kara Maciel, an attorney in Epstein, Becker & Green's Labor and Employment, Litigation, and Health Care and Life Sciences practice. …

 

A ruling against the subsidies could be good news for employers because it would likely mean the end of the employer mandate, says Maciel. Some small employers are struggling with how they are going to comply with the "pay or play" provision of the ACA. "They would have a little more breathing room if there isn't an employee triggering the [employer mandate] provision," she tells HEX.