{
  "id": "R40729",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R40729",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 356220,
      "date": "2010-02-02",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T01:58:12.581507",
      "title": "Premium Conversion of Health Insurance",
      "summary": "Premium conversion allows employees to pay their share of employment-based health insurance premiums on a pre-tax basis. The tax treatment is difficult for people who are not tax experts to understand, as are the rules that limit its use in a manner some consider arbitrary and unfair. Premium conversion is sometimes referred to as \u201cpremium only\u201d or \u201csection 125 plans,\u201d causing further confusion.\nPremium conversion is authorized by section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code, a section entitled \u201ccafeteria plans.\u201d In general, the section allows taxpayers to choose among taxable and nontaxable benefits offered by an employer without paying taxes if they select the latter. As a rule under tax law, when taxpayers are offered a choice between taxable and normally nontaxable income they will be taxed on whichever they choose. Section 125 makes an exception to this rule for benefits such as health insurance that meet the section\u2019s requirements.\nSome cafeteria plans allow workers to choose among a number of benefits (hence the name), though others allow only a choice between cash and one nontaxable benefit. Premium conversion is restricted in this manner, with cash being in the form of wages that are not given up and health insurance being the one nontaxable benefit. Employers that offer premium conversion may also offer separate cafeteria plans with other choices.\nAll cafeteria plans must be in writing and meet a number of nondiscrimination rules regarding highly compensated employees and company officers and owners. The rules are complex, and some make it difficult for small businesses to have the plans.\nSection 125 was included in the tax code in 1978, but it is not clear when employers began adopting premium conversion. It likely became more common as rising health care costs led employers to limit their insurance contributions and to help employees manage their own. Employers might obtain results similar to premium conversion by restricting wage growth and using the savings to increase what they pay for premiums. However, only premium conversion allows workers the flexibility to individually choose this outcome.\nRetirees sometimes complain that they cannot take advantage of premium conversion. The barrier is not section 125 but an IRS determination that distributions from qualified retirement plans are always subject to taxes, aside from several minor exceptions. Legislation, H.R. 1203 (Van Hollen) and S. 491 (Webb), has been introduced in the 1111th Congress to allow premium conversion for federal retirees.\nIn its 2006 health care reform legislation, Massachusetts required all employers with 11 or more full-time equivalent workers to adopt premium conversion. Consideration might be given to whether a similar requirement might be included in health care reform legislation now before Congress. If it is included, Congress might also consider making it easier for small businesses to establish premium conversion, as it might establishing separate nondiscrimination rules for it. However, some in Congress are considering limiting the tax exclusion for employer-provided coverage, not expanding it; presumably they would not favor extending premium conversion to more employees.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R40729",
          "sha1": "5eabefa00239f04d7b1e6397a213deb48654554f",
          "filename": "files/20100202_R40729_5eabefa00239f04d7b1e6397a213deb48654554f.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R40729",
          "sha1": "1a9d3b7d5a8b75155541bd2181314245f736c288",
          "filename": "files/20100202_R40729_1a9d3b7d5a8b75155541bd2181314245f736c288.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Domestic Social Policy",
    "Health Policy"
  ]
}