Healthcare

The landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision being cheered as a step toward equality is also poised to carry unintended consequences, including some that could make life harder for employees, gay and straight alike.

Women more likely than men to take advantage of workplace financial wellness programs, yet still experience more financial stress than men.

Commentary: With the Supreme Court decision behind us, there are a series of critical concerns employers and their advisers must focus on now.

Commentary: The next case to watch, launched by Speaker John Boehner last November, could once again put public exchange assistance in jeopardy.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in King v. Burwell that subsides on the federally-facilitated marketplace can continue may present an opportunity for struggling state-based marketplaces to switch to Healthcare.gov, as other challenges remain for exchanges nationwide.

Eliminating subsidies ‘would destabilize the individual insurance market in any state with a federal exchange,’ Chief Roberts says.

Today, in a 6-3 decision written by Chief Justice Roberts, the Supreme Court ruled in King v. Burwell that subsidies used to purchase health insurance in the 36 states on the federally facilitated marketplace are legal, thus avoiding the “death spiral” so often referred to by Congress. What does this ruling mean for employers?

The time of “what-ifs” for employers ended Thursday as the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling upholding the challenge to state subsidies in King v. Burwell, and employers should maintain business as usual going forward, according to most industry observers.

The Supreme Court’s highly anticipated decision in King v. Burwell to uphold subsidies on the federal exchange removes uncertainty and shifts the focus of advisers and their clients back to ACA compliance.

Commentary: The ACA is “unremovable,” says columnist Nelson Griswold, so advisers must learn how to leverage it.