• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Donate Now
  • Sign up for CMA’s weekly newsletter!

Center for Medicare Advocacy

Advancing Access to Medicare and Healthcare

  • Eligibility/Enrollment
  • Coverage/Appeals
    • Medicare Costs
    • Self Help Materials – Toolkits & More
  • Topics
    • Basic Introduction to Medicare
    • Medicare Costs
    • Home Health Care
    • Improvement Standard and Jimmo News
    • Nursing Home / Skilled Nursing Facility Care
    • Outpatient Observation Status
    • Part B
    • Part D / Prescription Drug Benefits
    • Medicare for People Under 65
    • Medicare “Reform”
    • All Other Topics
    • Resources
      • Infographics
  • Publications
    • CMA Alerts
    • Fact Sheets & Issue Briefs
    • Infographics
    • The Medicare Handbook
    • SNF Enforcement Newsletter
    • Elder Justice Newsletter
    • Medicare Facts & Fiction
    • Articles by Topic
  • Litigation
    • Litigation News
    • Cases
    • Litigation Archive
    • Amicus Curiae Activities
  • Newsroom
    • Press Releases
    • Editorials & Letters to the Editor
    • CMA Comments, Responses, and Letters
    • CMA in the News
  • About Us
    • National Voices of Medicare Summit
    • Mission Statement
    • CMA FAQs
    • CMA Annual Impact Report
    • Personnel & Boards
    • The Center for Medicare Advocacy Founder’s Circle
    • Connecticut Dually Eligible Appeals Project
    • Community Outreach and Education Project (COEP)
    • National Medicare Advocates Alliance
    • CMA Webinars
    • Products & Services
    • Testimonials
    • Career, Fellowship & Internship Opportunities
    • Contact Us
  • Support Our Work
    • Donate Now
    • Build a Legacy with CMA
    • Join the Center for Medicare Advocacy Founder’s Circle
    • Take Action
    • Share Your Health Care Story
    • Tell Congress to Protect Our Care
    • Listen to Medicare & Health Care Stories
    • Sign up for CMA’s weekly newsletter!

People with Medicare Beware: COBRA Is Not Coverage as a “Current” Employee

November 24, 2015

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Caution

Advocates have seen an increase in the number of Medicare beneficiaries who have delayed enrolling in Medicare Part B, thinking, erroneously, that because they are paying for and receiving continued health coverage under COBRA, they do not have to enroll in Medicare Part B.[1]  COBRA-qualified beneficiaries who have delayed enrollment in Medicare Part B do not qualify for a special enrollment period (SEP) to enroll in Part B after their COBRA coverage ends.[2] (They may, however, qualify for a SEP to enroll in Part D at that time if the drug coverage they had under COBRA constitutes creditable coverage.)[3] Only individuals who delay enrolling in Part B because they are covered under an employee group health plan (EGHP) by reason of “current” employment may take advantage of the SEP rules.[4] Individuals on COBRA do not meet the definition of having current employment status.[5]

Consequences

Medicare Part B – The consequences of delayed Part B enrollment can be severe.  Generally, the beneficiary who does not enroll during his or her initial enrollment period and who is not entitled to a SEP must wait to enroll in the next general enrollment period (January – March), with benefits starting on July 1 of that year.[6] Further, there is a 10% late enrollment penalty added to the standard monthly premium for every 12 months of delayed enrollment in Part B.[7] The penalty has no durational limit.[8]

Under Part D, the penalty is 1% of the national base beneficiary premium in a given year times the number of full, uncovered months of eligibility without other creditable drug coverage.[9] A Part D eligible individual must pay the late penalty if there is a continuous period of 63 days or longer at any time after the end of the individual’s initial enrollment period during which the individual meets all of the following conditions: (1) The individual was eligible to enroll in a Part D plan; (2) The individual was not covered under any creditable prescription drug coverage; and (3) The individual was not enrolled in a Part D plan.[10]

About COBRA

COBRA is the acronym applied to continuation coverage that was made available through the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) of 1985.[11] Private employers who offer EGHP coverage and who normally employed 20 or more workers on a typical business day during the preceding calendar year must offer COBRA coverage to employees and their dependents when they lose their EGHP-sponsored health insurance because of certain specified events.[12]  Covered employees, or workers, are only eligible for COBRA based on termination of their employment or reduction in their hours.[13]

An individual eligible to purchase COBRA is referred to as a “qualified beneficiary.”[14]  Qualified beneficiaries include covered employees, spouses, dependent children, and retirees, their dependents, or their surviving spouses if the retiree’s former employer files a petition for bankruptcy.[15]

The six qualifying events for COBRA coverage are defined in the statute as:

  •     The death of a covered employee
  •     The termination (other than for gross misconduct), or reduction in hours, of the covered employee’s employment
  •     The divorce or legal separation of the covered employee from the employee’s spouse
  •     The covered employee’s entitlement to Medicare
  •     A dependent child’s losing dependent status
  •     The filing for bankruptcy by a retiree’s former employer.[16]

Reminder

It is important that people with Medicare are advised about COBRA rules and about the circumstances under which they can use a SEP to avoid a late enrollment penalty.

 

 


[1] See § 9.05 (Coordination of COBRA Rights and Medicare) of the “2015 Medicare Handbook,” Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, written by the staff of the Center for Medicare Advocacy, Inc.  The book is available through http://www.wklawbusiness.com/ (site visited September 11, 2015).
[2] CMA. “Medicare & You!” 2015. https://www.medicare.gov/Pubs/pdf/10050.pdf (site visited September 11, 2015).
[3] See 42 C.F.R. §423.38(c) (special enrollment period) as described in §423.38(c)(8)(ii).  See also 42 C.F.R. §§423.46; 423.286(c)(3); 423.286(d)(3). The SEP begins with the month the beneficiary is advised of the loss of creditable drug coverage and ends 60 days from the loss of the coverage or from the date of the notice, whichever is later. See also, CMS “Creditable Coverage Disclosure to CMS Instructions & Screenshots.” 2012. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Prescription-Drug-Coverage/CreditableCoverage/Downloads/CreditableCoverageDisclosureUserManual05292012.pdf. A Part D eligible individual must pay the late penalty if there is a continuous period of 63 days or longer at any time after the end of the individual’s initial enrollment period during which the individual meets all of the following conditions: (1) The individual was eligible to enroll in a Part D plan; (2) The individual was not covered under any creditable prescription drug coverage; and (3) The individual was not enrolled in a Part D plan. 42 U.S.C. §1395W-113(b)(2), 42 C.F.R. §423.46 (Late enrollment penalty).
[4] 42 C.F.R. §§407.20(b), (c).
[5] 42 C.F.R. §411.104.
[6] 42 C.F.R. §§407.15(a), 407.25.
[7] 42 U.S.C. §1395(r); 42 C.F.R. §408.22. CMS. “Part B Late Enrollment Penalty.” https://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/part-b-costs/penalty/part-b-late-enrollment-penalty.html (site visited September 11, 2015).
[8] See 42 C.F.R. §§408.24, 408.25.  For disabled beneficiaries under age 65, the penalty will end when they turn 65. For persons under age 65 paying the penalty, the penalty goes away at age 65. See §1837(g)(1) of the SSA; POMS HI00805.085(B). Note, for Part A, the 10% penalty extends for twice the number of full 12 months of delay.  42 C.F.R. §406.32(d).
[9] See 42 U.S.C. §1395W-113(b)(3).
[10] 42 U.S.C. §1395W-113(b)(2), 42 C.F.R. §423.46 (Late enrollment penalty).
[11] See Pub. L. No. 99-272 (Apr. 7, 1986), 100 Stat. 222, codified at 26 U.S.C. §4980(b), 29 U.S.C. §1161 et seq, 42 U.S.C. §§300bb-1, et seq.
[12] See 29 U.S.C. §1161(b).  State and local governments employing more than 20 employees also must offer continuation coverage.  42 U.S.C. §300bb-1(a).  Federal employees have their own health care continuation coverage. 5 U.S.C. §8905a.
[13] See 29 U.S.C. §§1163(2), 1167(2).
[14] 29 U.S.C. §1161(a).
[15] 29 U.S.C. §1167(2), (3).
[16] 29 U.S.C. §1163.

 

Filed Under: Article Tagged With: COBRA, Enrollment, Fact and Fiction, Medicare Summary, Weekly Alert

Primary Sidebar

Easy Access to Understanding Medicare

The Center for Medicare Advocacy produces a range of informative materials on Medicare-related topics.
Sign Up for CMA's Free Newsletter
Register for CMA's Free Webinars

  • Medicare Basics
  • Medicare Reform
  • CMA Alerts
  • Fact Sheets & Issue Briefs
  • CMA Webinars
  • Connecticut Info & Projects
  • Health Care Stories
  • Se habla Español

Jimmo v. Sebelius

Medicare covers skilled care to maintain or slow decline as well as to improve.

Improvement Isn’t Required. It’s the law!

Read more.

National Voices of Medicare Summit

With the many threats currently facing the Medicare program, now is the time to come together as allies and explore ways to advocate for comprehensive Medicare coverage, health equity, and quality health care. Drawing inspiration from real-life experiences and stories of beneficiaries and caregivers, we hope to share impactful discussions with you.

Learn more.

Center for Medicare Advocacy Follow 10,543 5,330

A national nonpartisan, nonprofit law organization working to advance access to comprehensive #Medicare coverage and quality #healthcare.

CMAorg
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
13 Feb 2022350854955864486

Medicare’s 3-day hospital rule is supposed to control costs. It actually increases them.

Longer hospital stays. Higher spending. More risk for patients.

Why are we still doing this?

To read more & sign-up for our free, weekly newsletter:⬇️

Image for twitter card

3-Day Inpatient Hospital Requirement Increases Total Medicare Costs - Center for Medicare Advocacy

Study finds that the 3-day inpatient requirement increases Medicare costs and does not improve patients’ health outcomes.

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2022350854955864486 Retweet on Twitter 2022350854955864486 0 Like on Twitter 2022350854955864486 1 X 2022350854955864486
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
12 Feb 2021999425598763065

AI in Medicare: Innovation — or a new barrier?

Medicare’s pilot uses AI to review claims in traditional Medicare to reduce wasteful spending. But could it also delay or deny care? What do you think?👇

For our free newsletter:

https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/medicare-is-experimenting-with-having-ai-review-21333053.php

Image for twitter card

Medicare is experimenting with having AI review claims – a cost-saving measure that could risk...

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2021999425598763065 Retweet on Twitter 2021999425598763065 0 Like on Twitter 2021999425598763065 0 X 2021999425598763065
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
10 Feb 2021236007962603840

Home health care doesn’t end just because a condition is chronic or stable.

In 2013, CMA won Jimmo v. Sebelius, making it clear:
Coverage depends on the need for skilled care — not on improvement.

Know Jimmo. Know your rights 👇
🔗

Image for twitter card

Know Jimmo | Home Health Care is Available for Medicare Beneficiaries with Long Term, Chronic, and...

The key to coverage is whether the individual requires skilled nursing or therapy and whether care would be safe ...

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2021236007962603840 Retweet on Twitter 2021236007962603840 2 Like on Twitter 2021236007962603840 1 X 2021236007962603840
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
9 Feb 2020978920435151256

Short staffing. Burnout. Residents left waiting.

What caregivers describe in Connecticut is a microcosm of a national nursing home crisis — and the human cost is real. Full story 👇

Our weekly alert:

https://www.newstimes.com/connecticut/article/trump-repeal-nursing-home-staffing-ct-21337753.php

Image for twitter card

Connecticut lawmakers, caregivers decry Trump-era repeal of nursing home staffing rules

Around 90% of nursing home beds are currently occupied in Connecticut. Advocates say by 2035 there could be a 3,000-bed shortage. 

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2020978920435151256 Retweet on Twitter 2020978920435151256 1 Like on Twitter 2020978920435151256 0 X 2020978920435151256
Load More

Footer

Stay Connected:

  • Contact Us
  • Sitemap
  • Products & Services
  • Copyright/Privacy

© 2026 · Center for Medicare Advocacy