ACA_2017_Austin IRS report

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!