ACA eligiblity

Technical topics regarding tax preparation.
#1
Posts:
634
Joined:
1-Feb-2015 3:15pm
Location:
USA
ACA Obamacare experts please help.

Client is the owner (100%) of a S-corp. He obtains his coverage from Obamacare. And his S-corp pays for his premiums. The S-corp follows the rule to put the premiums on his W-2. He then claims it as self-employed health insurance premium deduction in his tax return.

I believe there is a rule about ACA Obamacare eligibility is that the insured person should not be offered an affordable coverage by his employer. Client is an employee of his S-corp and so his S-corp is technically his employer. Now if his S-corp pays for his Obamacare policy premiums, would they consider the S-corp (his employer) has 'offered' him the policy and therefore it violates the 'affordable coverage' eligibility requirement?
 

#2
Posts:
6101
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 3:06pm
Location:
WA State
No...the s-corp hasn't paid his premiums. They've provided him increased taxable compensation (via reimbursement). They also haven't offered him coverage via a health plan. That's what the exchange has done.

There is nothing in violation of ACA as you've described the scenario above.
~Captcook
 

#3
Posts:
634
Joined:
1-Feb-2015 3:15pm
Location:
USA
But the complication is that the payroll has been processed as in a way that the 'extra bonus' was health premiums. While the amount was included in box 1 of the W-2, it was not included in box 3 and box 5. Also, in box 14, the amount was noted as "2%HI". Would it be a catastrophic mistake?
 

#4
Posts:
6101
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 3:06pm
Location:
WA State
What you are describing is not a "complication". It is proper and correct reporting of the facts you've presented.
~Captcook
 

#5
Posts:
634
Joined:
1-Feb-2015 3:15pm
Location:
USA
I am thinking that if it was reported on the W-2 in that way, the amount paid by the S-corp was 'health premiums' but not 'extra bonus'. If it was 'extra bonus', the amount should go onto box 3 and box 5 too. Is my thinking incorrect?
 

#6
Posts:
634
Joined:
1-Feb-2015 3:15pm
Location:
USA
Any advice as to what should be done about it?

Or everything is fine and nothing needs to be done (hopefully)?
 

#7
Posts:
6101
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 3:06pm
Location:
WA State
I'm not sure how to say this any differently.

CaptCook wrote:It is proper and correct reporting of the facts you've presented.
~Captcook
 

#8
Posts:
634
Joined:
1-Feb-2015 3:15pm
Location:
USA
Thank you Captcook.

I am just curious. is it because those payments are still considered extra bonus even if they were processed as insurance payments in the payroll?
 

#9
Posts:
6101
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 3:06pm
Location:
WA State
They are insurance premium reimbursements. For >2% SH/EEs, insurance premium reimbursements are considered compensation and not employee benefits. That is why they are included in Box 1 and not deducted by the company as employee benefits. To say it differently, this treatment of the reimbursement specially allocates that expense to this SH via wages.
~Captcook
 

#10
Posts:
634
Joined:
1-Feb-2015 3:15pm
Location:
USA
Thank you CaptCook
 


Return to Taxation



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anderly, Google Adsense [Bot], JessCPA113, JR1, kyle242gt, NGeorgiaCPA, Nightsnorkeler, Tangled Web, Trailman423, wallbobbyc and 125 guests