Posted by: brucestein | May 7, 2008

HR 5719 – Part 2

My last blog entry has drawn quite the reaction!  A national trade association sent an e-mail to make it clear just how much they disliked my remarks regarding HR 5719, better known as the Taxpayer Assistance and Simplification Act.  As my blog explained, this bill is making the rounds in Washington and if passed will require Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to incorporate claim substantiation rules similar to those now in place for Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs).

 

I think it’s clear that this organization looks at the issue from a different perspective than we at TASC.  We approach this from an administrative standpoint.  Period.  Meanwhile, this trade group looks at the concept of HSAs in relationship to the health insurance industry overall.  Despite our different points of view, we are aligned 100 percent against such a high degree of substantiation requirement.

 

That’s right; I too oppose greater substantiation requirements.  In fact, I feel very strongly about just the opposite, that substantiation requirements should be relaxed for FSAs.  Doing so would help to create parity between HSAs and FSAs.  And after all, any and all legal and doable methods for helping combat the rising costs of healthcare should not be mired in hurdles relative to participation.

 

The political fight for and against increased substantiation will continue, and TASC will continue to watch and track its progress.  As always, we will remain a strong supporter of our Providers, including but not limited to those active in the insurance broker community.  Quite possibly, if substantiation requirements for HSAs are brought in line with those currently in place for FSAs, both sets of requirements may be relaxed.  Sometimes these things take a step backwards in the present before they are able to move forward in the future.

 

 

 

 

 


Categories

%d bloggers like this: