In This Issue - Click here to view a PDF
of the newsletter.
CMS Publishes Frequently Asked Questions About Survey and
Enforcement Policies During Public Health Emergencies
HR Corner - IRS and States to Focus on Questionable
Employment Tax Practices
CMS Publishes Frequently
Asked Questions About Survey and Enforcement Policies During Public
Health Emergencies
by
Ken Burgess
As part of its continuing
efforts to prepare for public health emergencies, and to assist
providers in understanding how federal regulatory requirements will
apply and enforcement will occur during such emergencies, CMS has
published a list of frequently asked questions in a memo to State Survey
Agency directors, dated October 24, 2007. According to CMS, the
document, which can be found on the CMS website (www.cms.hhs.gov), is
based largely on lessons learned following Hurricane Katrina.
The document was produced by
CMS’ Survey and Certification Group and assumes an “all hazard”
approach, meaning it would apply in cases of any public health emergency
declared by the federal government, including hurricanes, tornadoes,
earthquakes, floods, fires, chemical spills, nuclear or biological
attacks, flu pandemics, and so forth. The document is 36 pages in length
and covers survey and certification topics for a variety of health care
provider types, including nursing facilities.
Some of the questions posted
in the current version of the document deal with the use of volunteers
in emergencies, the role of State Survey Agencies and CMS during
emergencies, PASARR requirements, application of pending enforcement
sanctions such as denial of payment for new admission and civil money
penalties, the use during emergencies of nurse aides who are not listed
on the state nurse aide registry, and licensure verification
requirements for licensed personnel, among others. The general theme of
the FAQs is that CMS will utilize its discretion to waive or show
flexibility with certain survey and certification requirements during a
declared emergency, generally for the duration of the emergency as
defined by the federal government. Providers should still exercise due
diligence in meeting certification requirements, particularly in the
areas of ensuring employee competence and eligibility for assigned
roles. Section 1135(b) of the Social Security Act provides authority for
CMS to temporarily waive certain certification requirements if deemed
necessary to deal with a declared public health emergency. CMS is
expected to add additional questions to the FAQ list over time.
Ken
Burgess is a long term care attorney advising clients on a wide
variety of legal planning issues arising in the skilled nursing facility
setting, assisted living setting, and other aspects of long term care.
He is a frequent national lecturer and author of industry manuals,
national trade journal magazine articles and similar training tools. He
serves Poyner & Spruill clients by focusing on legal issues impacting
the long term care and health services sector. He may be reached at
919.783.2917 or
kburgess@poynerspruill.com.
Top
HR Corner - IRS and States to Focus on
Questionable Employment Tax Practices
by
Kevin Ceglowski
Employers should be aware of a new IRS focus
on employers who try to avoid paying required employment taxes. In an
attempt to cut down on this practice, the IRS recently announced that
agreements have been reached with 29 states to share the results of
employment tax examinations. The agreements are the first result of the
Questionable Employment Tax Practice (QETP) initiative, and they provide
a centralized, uniform means for the IRS and state employment officials
to exchange data regarding federal and state employment tax
requirements.
The QETP initiative is a collaborative,
nationwide program seeking to identify employment tax schemes and
illegal practices and increase voluntary compliance with employment tax
rules and regulations. Questionable employment tax practices are those
that have no objective other than to avoid federal and/or state
employment taxes. The states that have already signed partnership
agreements with the IRS are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South
Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Although North Carolina has not yet signed
such an agreement, it is likely that it will do so because it was part
of the team that developed the strategy and was instrumental in helping
make sure the agreements meet the needs of participating states as well
as the needs of the IRS.
The QETP initiative is an important reason
for employers to carefully re-examine classification of their workers
and their compliance with wage and tax laws. Increased and coordinated
enforcement efforts mean that if one agency audits an employer, that
agency may share its findings with other agencies, prompting those
agencies to begin their own audits. Employers engaged in questionable
employment tax practices may be faced with state and federal payroll tax
liability, withholding tax liability, workers’ compensation liability,
overtime pay claim liability, and claims relating to their retirement
plans and welfare plans. Employers concerned with whether their workers
should be classified as employees or independent contractors for
employment tax purposes should contact an attorney for advice on
compliance with state and federal regulations.
For questions regarding this article or
other employment matters, please contact
Kevin Ceglowski at
kceglowski@poynerspruill.com or 919.783.2853 or
Susie
Gibbons at
sgibbons@poynerspruill.com or 919.783.2813.
Top
|
