NVFC Addresses Possible Volunteer Health Insurance Requirement

While the U.S. fire/rescue service awaits an answer from the IRS on whether the new health care law will require volunteer agencies to provide health insurance to volunteers, EMS/Rescue section chair Ken Knipper of the National Volunteer Fire Council has a clear message: “Get on your legislators… it’ll make a difference.”

The issue is that volunteers are considered employees for tax purposes, so according to the new law they could fall under the coverage requirement at agencies with 50 or more volunteers who work 30 or more hours per week—a cost that most volunteer departments can’t afford.

While some department leaders are bracing for the potential impact and considering ways to prepare, such as dodging the requirement by cutting back on their volunteers, hours or benefit programs, others voice little concern, trusting in one of several scenarios: that either the IRS will exclude volunteers; that new legislation will pass to exclude volunteers; or that relatively few agencies would actually be affected and would manage to adapt. Some suggest that most volunteers would opt out of insurance coverage anyway because they already have it through their primary employers.

“I hope that common sense prevails,” says Knipper. “There are so many volunteers out there and they are under enough pressure as it is.”

Should departments do anything to prepare for the possibility they will be included under the health law?

“Most volunteer departments operate on a shoestring budget anyway,” Knipper says. “There’s no preparation possible; you can’t get blood out of a turnip." With some departments operating on budgets as low as $4,000 per year, Knipper notes, “There’s nothing else like it that would push them toward extinction.”

He does not recommend agencies cut personnel or hours.

“When you start telling people they can’t come around anymore, you’ll lose other ones too,” he says.

So what, if anything, should departments do at this point?

“I think they have to keep up with it—and get on your legislators,” Knipper says. “Pound them. You can not beat a bunch of phone calls and emails on a guy’s desk.” He also suggests going to the media with the issue to force local leaders to publicly support the legislation to exclude volunteers. “It’ll make a difference,” he says.

“You’ve got to have volunteers. Otherwise, communities have nothing.”

In the meantime, he doesn’t recommend that departments make any cuts to their systems to avoid inclusion.

“No, I don’t; I would stand up to this one,” Knipper says. “If it’s not right, oppose it. Just say you’re not going to do it.”

Quoting Martin Luther King Jr., Knipper says, “’A man can’t ride your back unless it’s bent’—and I don’t think we should bend on this one.”

News reports suggest many fire/rescue officials are simply awaiting more details. One of the questions being asked is whether towns with multiple small fire companies that only collectively have over 50 members would count.

When should we expect an answer from the IRS?

“It’s not going to be sat on, I can tell you that,” Knipper says. Officially, the answer will come whenever the IRS releases its final regulations this year, before the provision takes effect in 2015.

About the Legislation:

Meanwhile, legislation announced in December aims to exempt volunteer firefighters and EMTs from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, under a bill called the Protecting Volunteer Firefighters and Emergency Responders Act.

In support of the legislation the NVFC has issued a “Capwiz alert,” providing letters that supporters can copy and send to their House and Senate legislators, or can email directly through the online system.

The Letter:

Volunteers do not expect to receive health insurance from the agencies that they serve. Volunteering as a firefighter or EMS provider is not a career or a part-time job. Almost all volunteers are employed outside of the department that they serve and many of those employers furnish health insurance. If volunteers are treated as employees under the PPACA, thousands of firefighters and EMS personnel across the country who donate their time and services to their communities could end up losing their benefits or having their activities curtailed.I urge you to cosponsor H.R. 3685, the Protecting Volunteer Firefighters and Emergency Responders Act, which clarifies that volunteer fire and EMS agencies will not be required to offer health insurance to their volunteers under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).

Volunteer fire and EMS agencies operate on a shoe-string budget and don't have sufficient resources to pay for health insurance for their personnel. Most departments have to raise money privately by hosting community events and dinners just to make ends meet. Communities served by volunteer agencies typically have a small tax base and cannot afford to offer expensive benefits. While many communities provide small stipends or other incentives to show appreciation to volunteers for their service, having to provide health insurance would be a game-changer.  The overwhelming majority of the funds that volunteer emergency services agencies raise are devoted to paying for insurance, fuel, electricity, training and equipment. For most volunteer departments, the cost of paying for members' health insurance would increase operating expenses to an unsustainable level.

Volunteer fire and EMS agencies cannot pay for health insurance, nor should they be subject to tax penalties for failing to provide coverage. I urge you to cosponsor H.R. 3685 to prevent the nation's volunteer emergency services from being subject to this unintended consequence of health care reform.