The ACA Times


  Show menu
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Get to Know the ACA
  • ACA – Frequently Asked Questions
  • Resources
  • Meet the Editors
  • Trusaic
  • Contact Us
  • Legal
  
  • Home
  • ACA Compliance
  • Get to Know the ACA’s Rule of Parity

Articles

Get to Know the ACA’s Rule of Parity

February 20, 2019 Joanna Kim-Brunetti ACA Compliance
Get to Know the ACA’s Rule of Parity

3 minute read:

Without the proper tools or subject matter expertise, tackling the responsibilities of the Affordable Care Act’s Employer Mandate on your own can be overwhelming.

This is especially true if you are an employer in an industry which relies on employing large numbers of variable hour employees, such as restaurants, staffing organizations and home health care facilities.

Under the ACA’s Employer Mandate, employers with 50 or more full-time employees and full-time equivalent employees, are required to offer Minimum Essential Coverage (MEC) to at least 95% of their full-time workforce (and their dependents) whereby such coverage meets Minimum Value (MV) and is Affordable for the employee or be subject to IRS 4980H penalties. The IRS calls these organizations Applicable Large Employers (ALEs).

If you are an ALE with a predominately variable-hour workforce, you’ve likely been directed to use the IRS ’s Look-Back Measurement Method to determine which of your employees are considered full-time. Under the Look-Back Measurement Method, employers are allowed to monitor and track their employees’ hours of service for as little as three months and as long as 12 months to determine if they are full-time or part-time before extending an offer of health coverage. Under the ACA, the IRS defines a full-time employee for any calendar month as “an employee employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week, or 130 hours of service per month.”

ALEs that use the Look-Back Measurement Method should be mindful of the Rule of Parity. It could save you some money.

The Rule of Parity, as cited from the IRS regulations, is as follows: “For purposes of determining the period after which an employee may be treated as having terminated employment and having been rehired, an applicable large employer may choose a period, measured in weeks, of at least four consecutive weeks during which the employee was not credited with any hours of service that exceeds the number of weeks of that employee’s period of employment with the applicable large employer immediately preceding the period that is shorter than 13 weeks (for an employee of an educational organization employer, a period that is shorter than 26 weeks).”

Employers should note that in order for the Rule of Parity to be used, the period of absence must exceed the duration of the employee’s period of employment immediately before the break in service.

Here’s an example:

John Doe works as a dishwasher with a variable-hour schedule at a local restaurant. He has been employed by the restaurant for three years. He was determined to be full-time during his measurement period under the Look-Back Measurement Method, and was receiving health benefits from his employer during his corresponding stability period. He left the restaurant to pursue a job as a house painter during that stability period. He returned to the restaurant after 16weeks. When John returned, his employer no longer treated him as a full-time employee. Instead, the restaurant treated him as a new hire and started measuring his initial measurement period under the ACA as allowed by the Rule of Parity.

If John had returned to the restaurant before 13 weeks, rather than waiting to return until after 13 weeks (and in his case 16 weeks), his employer would have had to extend him an offer of health coverage for the remainder of his prior stability period because John was counted as a full-time employee as measured during his prior measurement period. But, because John had left his employment at the restaurant for more than 13 weeks, the restaurant could consider him a new hire under the ACA regulations, despite his three years of previous service.

In this case, the Rule of Parity relieves the restaurant from having to continue to pay John’s health insurance as a full-time employee by taking into account the length of time John was not working at the restaurant.

Whether you’re running a restaurant, staffing agency, healthcare facility or some other organization, complying with the ACA on your own can be difficult, especially if administering the Look-Back Measurement Method. Consider outsourcing a third-party expert who specializes in ACA compliance, data consolidation and analytics to avoid the headache and focus your resources on bettering your business.

To learn more about ACA compliance in 2021, click here.


We’re committed to helping companies reduce risk, avoid penalties, and achieve 100% ACA compliance. For questions about the ACA contact us here.

Summary
Get to Know the ACA’s Rule of Parity
Article Name
Get to Know the ACA’s Rule of Parity
Description
Employers administering the Look-Back Measurement Method to comply with ACA responsibilities should be mindful of the Rule of Parity.
Author
Joanna Kim-Brunetti
Publisher Name
The ACA Times
Publisher Logo
The ACA Times
Short URL of this page: https://acatimes.com/wxg
Joanna Kim-Brunetti

Joanna Kim-Brunetti

Joanna Kim-Brunetti, Esq., is Vice President of Regulatory Affairs for Trusaic.

View more by Joanna Kim-Brunetti

Related tags to article

ACA ComplianceACA ReportingAffordable Care ActApplicable Large EmployersData ConsolidationEmployer MandateIRSIRS 4980H PenaltiesLook-Back Measurement MethodMinimum Essential Coverage (MEC)Minimum Value (MV)RegulationsRule of Parity
Related Articles How to Leverage Your Workforce Data to Meet DEI Goals How to Leverage Your Workforce Data to Meet DEI Goals
Related Articles An Employer’s Guide to Navigating the DEI&A Landscape An Employer’s Guide to Navigating the DEI&A Landscape
Related Articles Governments, Investors, & Litigators Are Focusing More on ESG Governments, Investors, & Litigators Are Focusing More on ESG
Related Articles Administration Predicts Lower ACA Enrollment by Robert Sheen  •  
Related Articles IRS Eases Rules on Hardship Exemptions by Robert Sheen  •  
Related Articles HHS Awards $36 Million To Health Centers by Robert Sheen  •  
Subscribe

Popular Posts

  • California Individual Mandate Penalties Will be Issued in 2021
  • Biden’s Affordable Care Act Advancements are Underway
  • What Employers Need to Know About the 2020 ACA 1095-C Codes
  • Employers May Face Additional Challenges with 2020 ACA Reporting
  • Five Resources Essential for ACA Compliance in 2021
  • The IRS is Issuing ACA Penalty Letter 226J for 2018
  • Most Frequently Asked ACA Questions for Employers and Individuals
  • Taxpayers (Including Employers) Have the Right to the Challenge IRS

Trending Topics

  • Regulations
    (91)
  • Legislation
    (47)
  • Editorials
    (19)
  • ACA Compliance
    (126)
  • Tax Filings
    (19)
  • Applicable Large Employer (ALE)
    (13)
  • Penalties
    (18)
  • IRS
    (82)
  • Health Insurance Marketplace
    (28)
  • Polls/Surveys
    (18)
  • Health Care Reform
    (22)
  • Reporting
    (22)
  • IRS 226J/226-J
    (28)

Categories


Brought to you by Trusaic

 

 

 

Twitter Facebook

Downloads

The ACA 101 Toolkit

The Essential Guide to the ACA

Letter 226J Infographic

5 Common ACA Compliance Mistakes

Triangle of Trust

Articles

IRS Affordability Safe Harbors Help Avoid ACA Penalties

Calculating FT and FTE Employees

The ACA Monthly Measurement Method: A Few Examples

The IRS’s 1095 Forms for ACA Explained

Incorrect ITINs Will Cause Havoc With ACA Compliance

Knowledge Center

Get to know the ACA

Get to know Letter 226J

Webinar: The Recipe for Successful ACA Compliance

Trusaic News

Our Story

© 2021 Copyright Trusaic - All Rights reserved.

Close Window

Loading, Please Wait!

This may take a second or two. Loading, Please Wait!