Thursday, April 30, 2009

Zelinsky on ERISA 514(a) Preemption

Zelinsky_ed Edward Zelinsky (Cardozo) has just posted on SSRN his essay (forthcoming State Tax Notes) Golden Gate III, ERISA Preemption, and the San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance.  Here's the abstract:

An exploration of the most recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Golden Gate Restaurant Association v. City and County of San Francisco (Golden Gate III) indicates that ERISA Section 514(a) preempts the San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance. Two premises guide this exploration of Golden Gate III. First, employers’ ongoing payments to health care administrators, such as insurance companies, constitute employee benefit “plans” for ERISA purposes. Second, employers’ contributions are central features of their employee plans.

This first premise indicates that a San Francisco employer which regularly contributes to San Francisco pursuant to that City’s health ordinance thereby creates a “plan” for ERISA purposes. The ERISA status of this plan purchasing municipally-administered medical services is the same as the ERISA status of an analogous employer-financed plan paying a private administrator for comparable health care: As to all of these plans, ERISA Section 514(a) preempts state and local regulation.

Moreover, it is not persuasive for purposes of ERISA Section 514 to say (as does the Ninth Circuit) that San Francisco, by its health care ordinance, regulates employers’ health care contributions, but not employers’ health care plans. Contributions are central features of employers’ health care plans for their employees. By regulating employers’ contributions, San Francisco regulates employers’ plans.


Pension and Benefits, Scholarship | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Zelinsky on ERISA 514(a) Preemption:


Post a comment