1095C for Irvine is ready to run. Thanks!

Hi Jennifer Leugers

We have run 1095-C report on 'City of Irvine' company.
Please refer latest RUN '12/18/2017 11:04:53 PM' to download report.

PFA QA verification list.

Thanks!

Hi all - could you please explain the codes for Jessica Aguilar for June? We are showing a 1E / 2B and I don't show she is eligible for benefits until July. They also said some EPT employees who do not choose to enroll in benefits have a code of 2B on line 16, when it should be 2H. Example: Guadalupe Abuerto, Simran Aggarwal, Denise Bennett-Beatty

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

JESSICA L AGUILAR : Employee is actually hired on 05/24/2007 and her employment date is changed to 05/06/2017.She is not a re-hired employee.So new-hire/re hire rules do not apply to her.She has offer from May itself but as her employment date was changed,1H/2D showed up in May.She is part time employee and she has offer in June so 1E/2B is shown.

Guadalupe Abuerto, Simran Aggarwal, Denise Bennett-Beatty : These employees had offers even though they were not enrolled in any benefits.They are part time employees so for the months in which they had offers,1E/2B codes are shown.
From IRS Site:
2B: Enter code 2B if the employee is not a full-time employee for the month and did not enroll in minimum essential coverage, if offered for the month.

Please correct the codes if required using import or manual correction

Hi all - there is a Class value EPT under Class 1. The client wants the codes for this group to be 1E/2H if they had an offer of coverage and they did not enroll. we are currently showing a 2B but they are considered full-time based on the hours that they work. Please advise how we can get this done. Thanks!

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

System codes are reflecting as expected but to achieve the client expected codes, we need
to make the changes using 1095-C correction on UI or import.

Thanks,
Revan

Please re-run these forms so I can get the most up-to-date analysis to put onto the corrections s/s.

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

This group has been re-run. Please find the below run details for verification.

Thanks,
Revan

Hi all - I've made the corrections through the UI. Please re-run the forms. Thanks!

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

We have rerun '1095C for Irvine'.
Please refer latest run '1/24/2018 2:43:30 AM' to download.

Thanks!

Hi all - I'm still confused on employee Jessica Aguilar. Her hire date is 5.6.17 and we have the rule to be First of month following or coincident with xx days from date of hire (which we have set to 30). So why would her benefits on her form show as if she is offered on 6.1.17 instead of 7.1.17? Also when I do a QE for this employee for June, it defaults to July so she definitely was not getting an offer for June.

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

Employee Jessica Aguilar's employment date was changed from 05/24/2007 to 05/06/2017.Her status is not changed and is active since 2007.So system does not consider her as a re-hire employee.
Her effective date for new employment date is 05/09/2017.We use employment date as a base date to calculate waiting period. As she is effective from 05/09/2017(future of employment date) and her employment date is 05/06/2017, new-hire/re-hire rules do not apply as it considers her previous employment date(05/24/2007).
Ideally,this employee should have been terminated and then re-hired with new employment date.Then system would have processed codes appropriately.
We verified that this employee change is done through import.

Please correct the employee's codes through manual correction or import.

CC:Nandkumar Prabhakar Karlekar,Smita Pawar,Revansiddha Gaur

All - I still don't understand really. If I kick off an event and there are no benefits for June and I can't even kick off an event for June, how can we be showing she has an offer of coverage for June? Furthermore, per your logic, why would we be showing a 2D for June if the system is considering her being an employee back to 2007? Also, this isn't specific to her - the client is saying all of the EPT class are showing incorrectly. If it was just her, we would just change her record and be done with it but it is a much greater population. Another example - Guadalupe Aburto was changed from PT to EPT on 9.12.17 and the QE is set to FOM following 30 days. We are showing September as 2D and then showing a qualifying offer for October. There isn't an offer for him until November. Emily Bangwin is another issue. It appears the issue is mostly in those who went from PT to EPT but the QE says FOM following 30 days but the forms are not reflecting that.

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

We are showing 2D in the month of employment because the employee's employment date is changed.So 2D gets populated for that month.But as there is mismatch between employment date and effective date,new-hire/re-hire rules does not get applied because we consider employment date as a base date for calculating his waiting period.

However, since there are large number of employees, we have made some changes in the 1095C processing code to consider effective date of employment date so that waiting period is calculated correctly as per new-hire/rehire rules.

Since correction is applied to the employees mentioned in your comment,1H/2D codes was getting overwritten with correction codes.
We have deleted the correction data of the mentioned employees of the months where 1H/2D is expected.In correction,1E/2H was given for those months.
We have re-run the report and in latest run,all employees mentioned in your comment have correct waiting period.Please verify the latest run.
For other EPT employees,if correction data is present for the the months where 1H/2D is expected then those will be overwritten Please verify the same.

CC:Nandkumar Prabhakar Karlekar,Smita Pawar,Revansiddha Gaur

All - we are getting a lot of push back from clients on when we use the 2B code. Within the IRS definition, it doesn't say that the individual had to have an offer of coverage. I think we need to revisit our logic and use 2B if the employee was part time, regardless if they had an offer. Seems in a lot of those instances, we are leaving it blank instead of using 2B.

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

We do not recommend showing 2B for employees who are part time regardless of offer.
IRS Instruction says as follows:

2B Can be provided in below cases:
1. Employee is part time and did not enroll in ACA plan,if offered for that month.
2. Employee is full time and got terminated.Due to termination his coverage got terminated.

Even if you want this change,we will make this change by removing the condition of employee eligible for offers for 2B.
This change will require codes regression testing.
Please provide us go ahead for making this change on all clients.

CC:Nandkumar Prabhakar Karlekar,Smita Pawar,Revansiddha Gaur

All - I've read the description of that from the IRS but it doesn't say they have to be part time and offered coverage. It says "if offered for the month". It doesn't say they have to have the offer. For those who are part time for part of the year and go to full time, we are using a 1H on line 14 and a blank on line 16. So we are telling the IRS that the employee didn't have an offer of coverage but we aren't telling them why (the blank on line 16). I think we really need to discuss making this change for next year (too far into this year to change it now so will be making the changes from the UI).

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

We have added this point in our learning and will look into it after execution.

However, just for verification purpose,we removed the condition of employee eligible in 2B logic of 1095C processing and re-run the report.
Comparing with previous run,the only change that we got is change from 1H/Blank to 1H/2B for all employees who are part time.
We spot checked some of the employees :
1. ELHAM KASIRMOALEM
2. EMILIA MARACINE
3. KENDRA SIFUENTEZ

We additionally checked if there are any other records who have 1H/Blank,but did not find any in latest run.
Please refer latest run for verification and let us know if any additional changes are required.

Note: This change is only on this company.In case it is required on any other company please let us know as back-end changes are required for this.

CC: Nandkumar Prabhakar Karlekar,Smita Pawar,Revansiddha Gaur

Hi all - made a few corrections through the UI. One EE needs to be updated with blanks though - David Cardon needs to show a 1H / blank for January - June. After you make that correction, could you please re-run the files? Thanks!

Hi Jennifer Leugers,

For David Cardon, we made changes to accommodate,1H/Blank and re-run the report.
Please refer latest run dated "2/21/2018 11:34:49 PM "for verification.
We have spot checked below employees in latest run:
EMILEE J KOERNER
LUKE R CHEN
DAVID b CARDON
MICHELLE D MANARD

Closing this ticket