-
Type:
Support Activity
-
Status: Closed
-
Priority:
Medium
-
Resolution: Done
-
Affects Version/s: None
-
Fix Version/s: None
-
Component/s: ACA
-
Labels:None
-
Support Task Type:Query Resolution
-
Environment:Production
-
Reported by:Client
-
Company:Austin
-
Module:ACA - 2017
-
Severity:Simple
Email received from Jennifer.
Hi all –
I went ahead and ran the 1095C report for Austin Industries (Austin Industrial Services) and I have a question on the 1095C analysis.
In column U – Minimum Employee Cost Offered and column V – Minimum Employer Cost Offered both are showing $0 for all employees. Should that be how the analysis is showing? If so, could you please help me understand the purpose of those columns.
Also – for column R, where is it pulling the information as to whether the employee is Full Time or Part Time? And then how does that impact column W? For example, I am showing am employee with Full Time in column R but in column W, it says Yes (that they are part time for the whole range). How can that be? Employee is Andres Adame.
On the ACA 1095C Analysis tab, under the Code Analysis, it shows 1H / 2C as Invalid. I understand why this code would be invalid as it is stating that there was no offer of coverage but they were enrolled. My question is how are we producing those codes? Example employees – Corey Austin, Cesilia Briones.
Under the Line 22 (1094C) based on this run, it states that A is Yes and that D is No. Why does it only address A&D and not any other options on the 1094C?
I just want to be able to explain these items when clients ask.
Hi all – sorry for the multiple emails but I have another question. I ran the Bridge & Road 1095C analysis and have a question about the percentage being shown under the MEC Indicator in the ACA 1095C Analytics tab. I can’t see how we are coming up with that # so if you could please let me know,
I know that was a lot of our questions last year. That way I can answer the question before they ask! Thanks!
Hi Jennifer Leugers,
Please feel free to reopen ticket, if anything extra is needed.
We are closing this ticket now.
Thanks,
Smita Pawar (Inactive)
added a comment - Hi Jennifer Leugers ,
Please feel free to reopen ticket, if anything extra is needed.
We are closing this ticket now.
Thanks, 
Hi Jennifer Leugers,
Please find Harbinger inline replies for your questions.
Q: 1 In column U – Minimum Employee Cost Offered and column V – Minimum Employer Cost Offered both are showing $0 for all employees. Should that be how the analysis is showing? If so, could you please help me understand the purpose of those columns.
Ans: Harbinger comment: Actually process eligibility was not run on Austin production company. When we run process eligibility on main Austin company, we observed that only new hire employees who are in Limited Non- assessment Period and non eligible employees got zero cost.
Q: 2 Also – for column R, where is it pulling the information as to whether the employee is Full Time or Part Time? And then how does that impact column W? For example, I am showing am employee with Full Time in column R but in column W, it says Yes (that they are part time for the whole range). How can that be? Employee is Andres Adame.
Ans:Harbinger comment: The system pulls the data of part time and full time from his demographics field "Employee Type".If the employee type is not set then he is considered as full time by default.
On further analysis of this employee we found out that this employee was hired and terminated on the same day without any employee type change.So the employee showed up as full time.There are some more employees having the same scenario.The system shows the data that is present in the database. However as the employee was never worked for a single day(since he was hired and terminated the same day) he gets code 2A as per the code priority set.These columns do not affect any codes .These columns are for our internal analysis.
Q:3 On the ACA 1095C Analysis tab, under the Code Analysis, it shows 1H / 2C as Invalid. I understand why this code would be invalid as it is stating that there was no offer of coverage but they were enrolled. My question is how are we producing those codes? Example employees – Corey Austin, Cesilia Briones.
Ans: Harbinger comment: Process eligibility was not run on Austin company.We have run the process eligibility on main company. Now 1H / 2C codes are not reflecting on 1095-C pdf.
Q:4 I ran the Bridge & Road 1095C analysis and have a question about the percentage being shown under the MEC Indicator in the ACA 1095C Analytics tab. I can’t see how we are coming up with that # so if you could please let me know,
I know that was a lot of our questions last year. That way I can answer the question before they ask!
Ans: Harbinger comment:
In analysis report, filters can be applied to ACA 1095C Codes sheet to get the count details.
Total EE Count:Month-wise count of EE's who are employed for the whole month and Line 16 code does not contain 2A.
EE Count with Offer to Dependents: Month-wise count of EE's who are employed for the whole month and Line 16 code does not contain 2A and 2D and Line 14 contains 1A,1E,1K and 1C as these codes represent offer to EE and dependents.
*FTE Count: *Month-wise count of EE's who are employed for the whole month and Line 16 code does not contain 2A and 2D
Please let us know, if you need any additional information.
Thanks