Healthcare benefits

Employer clients and their employees expect innovative technology solutions to meet their needs, even when it comes to health care — and especially when it comes to private exchanges.

Rising health care costs and concerns for employees’ financial wellness and retirement preparedness are nudging employers to re-evaluate their benefit offerings.

Commentary: Having quality data is great for comparing health plan, facility and treatment performance, but it unfortunately hasn’t led to predictable costs.

Commentary: Questions plan sponsors should be asking of their insurance carrier, payroll vendor and benefits technology provider in advance of the ACA’s information reporting requirements.

Although the Supreme Court upheld subsidies on the exchanges, there remain key aspects of the ACA that broker and employer lobbyist organizations continue to seek to amend and/or repeal.

Commentary: The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 allows quality measurement organizations to develop quality measures using Medicare data and share it with employers and insurers for the purposes of designing their health plans.

Friday’s landmark ruling on gay marriage poses both challenges and benefits to employers.

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.

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.

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.

A 6-3 decision in favor of the HHS secretary in King v. Burwell means tax credits can continue to be used to purchase health coverage in states using the federal exchange.

An aging workforce, coupled with demands for the latest eyewear fashions, is putting pressure on employer-sponsored vision benefits.

Commentary: The vast majority of employers are not prepared to meet — and some remain simply unaware of — the employer mandate’s complex reporting obligations.

Commentary: Billions of dollars in federal subsidies are on the line in the Supreme Court’s highly anticipated King v. Burwell decision expected any day now. What does that mean for the benefits industry?

An “engagement chasm” is adding to the low adoption and participation rates employers face when developing their health and wellness programs, with even electronic or online tools doing little to keep employees motivated in health, fitness and dietary programs.

No longer hiding on an intranet or mentioned in a one-off meeting, voluntary benefits are making a big impact on private exchanges, especially as high deductible plans increase and employees self-select into lower coverage.

Most of the 13 state-run public health insurance have collectively spent $4.8 billion in federal funding during their first 17 months of operations and face serious cash-flow problems.