October 14, 2021

IRS Issues Guidance Clarifying "Involuntary Termination" for COBRA Subsidy Under the American Rescue Plan Act

You've Reached Your
Free Article Limit This Month
Subscribe now to get unlimited access to all OnPractice content. Your subscription is free.
Subscribe Now

The IRS recently issued Notice 2021-31 (Notice) which provides additional guidance to assist employers in implementing the COBRA premium assistance provisions of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP). As discussed in our prior advisory, ARP provides a temporary COBRA subsidy equal to 100% of the applicable COBRA premium to assistance eligible individuals from April 1, 2021 to September 30. The Notice provides answers to a number of questions that have arisen in regards to the COBRA premium assistance provisions of ARP, particularly with respect to what circumstances qualify as an involuntary termination for purposes of determining eligibility for the subsidy.

What constitutes an involuntary termination of employment?

The Notice defines an involuntary termination as a severance from employment due to the independent exercise of the unilateral authority of the employer, other than due to the employee's implicit or explicit request, where the employee was willing and able to continue performing services. Whether a termination is involuntary must ultimately be based on an examination of the facts and circumstances. For example, if a termination is designated as voluntary, or as a resignation, but the facts and circumstances indicate that the employee was willing and able to continue performing services, so that, absent the voluntary termination, the employer would have terminated the employee's services, and that the employee had knowledge that the employee would be terminated, the termination will be treated as involuntary.

Can an involuntary termination of employment include a termination of employment initiated by the employee?

Yes. An employee initiated termination of employment can be deemed an involuntary termination if the termination is for "good reason" in response to employer actions resulting in a material negative change in the employment relationship, similar to constructive discharge. For example, an employee-initiated termination of employment due to an involuntary material reduction in hours would qualify as an involuntary termination of employment for purposes of COBRA premium assistance, even if the reduction in hours did not result in the loss of health plan coverage. Similarly, a resignation as the result of a material change in the geographic location of employment for the employee will also qualify as an involuntary termination of employment.

What other changes to the employment relationship constitute an involuntary termination under the Notice?

The Notice identifies a number of other termination scenarios that qualify as an involuntary termination for purposes of COBRA premium assistance, including:

  • Non-renewal of an employee's contract if the employee was otherwise willing to enter into a new contract or continue employment without a contract. If, however, at the time the employee entered into the expiring contract, the employee understood the contract was for a set term and would not be renewed, the completion of the contract is not an involuntary termination of employment. 
  • Participation in a window program that meets the requirements of Treasury Regulation § 31.3121(v)(2)-1(b)(4)(v).
  • Employer initiated action to end an individual's employment while the individual is absent from work due to illness or disability if, before the action, there is a reasonable expectation that the employee will return to work after the illness or disability has subsided.
  • An involuntary termination for "Cause"; provided, however, if the termination is due to gross misconduct of the employee, the loss of coverage due to a termination of employment for gross misconduct will not result in an individual becoming eligible for COBRA or COBRA premium assistance. 

Which changes to the employment relationship do not equate to an involuntary termination?

The Notice also identifies a variety of termination scenarios that do not qualify as an involuntary termination for purposes of COBRA premium assistance, including:

  • An employee initiated termination of employment due to the employee's child being unable to attend school or childcare facility due to COVID-19. If, however, the employee maintains the ability to return to work so that the event is a temporary leave of absence, then the employee could qualify for the premium subsidy as a voluntary reduction in hours.
  • An employee initiated termination of employment due to general concerns about workplace safety. However, if the employee can demonstrate that the employer's actions resulted in a change to the employment relationship analogous to a constructive discharge, then the termination can qualify as an involuntary termination.
  • A termination due to gross misconduct. Termination for gross misconduct is not a COBRA qualifying event thus the employee is not eligible for premium assistance as he/she is not eligible for COBRA.
  • An employee's retirement, unless the facts indicate that the employee was willing to work and knew the employer was planning on terminating the employee.
  • The death of the employee.

Is a voluntary reduction in hours a triggering event for ARP premium assistance?

Yes. A reduction in hours can create eligibility for premium assistance regardless of whether the reduction in hours is voluntary or involuntary. A reduction in hours includes work stoppage due to lawful strike initiated by employees, a lockout initiated by the employer, or a furlough. For this purpose, the Notice defines the term "furlough" as a temporary loss of employment or complete reduction in hours with a reasonable expectation of return to employment or resumption of hours (for example, due to an expected business recovery of the employer) such that the employer and employee intend to maintain the employment relationship. A furlough may be a reduction in hours regardless of whether the employer initiated the furlough, or the individual participated in a furlough process analogous to a window program.

What important steps should employers take?

In light of this new guidance, employers should continue to analyze employee termination data to ensure that all eligible employees and former employees, and qualified beneficiaries, who are entitled to the COBRA premium subsidy have been properly identified and received the required COBRA notice and election forms.  If you have any questions about the Notice, please contact Barbara Sanchez-Salazar or John McGrady.

ALM expressly disclaims any express or implied warranty regarding the OnPractice Content, including any implied warranty that the OnPractice Content is accurate, has been corrected or is otherwise free from errors.

More From Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney

DOJ Brings Charges in First Insider Trading Case Involving Cryptocurrency Markets, as Parallel SEC Complaint Categorizes Crypto Assets as Securities

By Jason P. Bologna Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney July 28 , 2022

On July 21, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced insider trading allegations against three defendants related to the trading of crypto assets, in what U.S. Attorney Damian Williams heralded as the “first ever insider trading case involving cryptocurrency markets.”

DOJ Secures Major Settlement with Poultry Processors and Consulting Company to Stop Anticompetitive Compensation Information Exchanges and Agreements

By Carrie G. Amezcua Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney July 27 , 2022

Continuing the federal antitrust agencies’ focus on anticompetitive conduct in labor markets, on July 25, the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division (DOJ) announced a major complaint and settlement with poultry processors, along with a consulting company and its owner, for conspiring to suppress wages and exchanging wage and benefits information.

More From Employment Law

Workplace Safety Review: Episode 28 | Interview with Nadine Mancini

By Michael T. Taylor Greenberg Traurig August 01 , 2022

In this episode, Mike Taylor and Adam Roseman talk to Nadine Mancini, General Counsel for the federal Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission in Washington, D.C.

3rd Circuit Issues Practical Death Knell to Nationwide FLSA Collective Actions Involving Employers Not Subject to General Jurisdiction in Circuit

By James N. Boudreau Greenberg Traurig July 29 , 2022

On July 26, 2022, in a win for employers, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a precedential opinion in Christa Fischer, et al. v. Federal Express Corp., et al, No. 21-1683, affirming a decision from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that refused to allow two opt-in plaintiffs to join a putative collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) because the proposed plaintiffs’ claims for unpaid overtime had no connection to Pennsylvania.

Asked & Answered: GT's Labor & Employment Podcast Episode 6: The Clash of Religious Objections and LGBTQ+ Rights in the Workplace

By Kelly Dobbs Bunting Greenberg Traurig July 29 , 2022

GT Labor & Employment Practice Shareholder Kelly Bunting and Associate Malcolm Ingram discuss the laws and regulations affecting workplaces regarding religious objections and LGBTQ+ rights.

Featured Stories