Comparable State Continuation Coverage
Q-61. Does a State continuation coverage program fail to provide comparable coverage qualifying for COBRA premium assistance under the ARP solely because the maximum period of continuation coverage under the program differs from the maximum period available under Federal COBRA?
A-61. No. A different period of continuation coverage under a State continuation coverage program does not by itself mean a State program fails to provide comparable coverage to Federal COBRA continuation coverage under the ARP. For example, the fact that a State continuation coverage program provides only six months of continuation coverage (instead of 18 months) would not by itself result in the State program failing to provide comparable coverage. Similarly, State programs providing for different qualifying events, different qualified beneficiaries, or different maximum premiums generally do not fail to provide comparable coverage solely for those reasons.
Q-62. In the case of an insured plan subject solely to State law requiring the insurer to provide continuation coverage, is the employer eligible to take the premium assistance credit directly if the employer pays the full premium to the insurer?
A-62. No. Under § 6432(b)(3), in the case of an insured plan subject solely to State law with respect to the requirement to provide continuation coverage, the premium payee is the insurer providing the coverage under the group health plan. The Treasury Department and the IRS are aware that this requirement may create administrative issues for certain Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) exchanges that aggregate premiums paid by participating employers or where State rules require full payment of premiums by the employer; the Treasury Department and the IRS are continuing to consider this issue.