PBGCPBGC Opinion LettersSep 30, 1994
…( 4)( B)>
421 9 N otice & Co llection o f W ithdraw al Liab ility
422 1 Reso lution of Disputes
>29 USC 1461 n ote >
OP INI ON :
I
wri te i n res ponse t o your reque st for the opini on
of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation ("PBG C").
Your
fir st r equest c oncerns a par ticu lar
applicat ion of t he princ iples…
75 FR 43330 — Interim Final Rules for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Internal Claims and Appeals and External Review Processes Under the Patient… IRCFinal Rules (FR)Jul 23, 2010
…ing Department of Labor claims procedure regulation. That is, the Department of Labor interprets 29 USC 1133 and the DOL claims procedure regulation as already requiring that plans provide claimants with new or additional evidence or rationales upon request and an opportunity to respond in certain circumstances.
See
Br…
IRCCourt RulingsJul 26, 1989related by meaning
June 19, 1986, the Court of Appeals affirmed our decision sub nom. Dillon v. United States, 792 F.2d 849 (9th Cir. 1986).
The parties also stipulated: Petitioners accept the determination of tax contained in the deficiency notice as mathematically correct, except they contend that the tax should be computed by applying…
75 FR 37188 — Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Preexisting Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and Annual Limits, Rescissions, and Patient Protections IRCFinal Rules (FR)Jun 28, 2010
… read as follows:
Authority:
2701 through 2763, 2791, and 2792 of the Public Health Service Act (42 USC 300gg through 300gg-63, 300gg-91, and 300gg-92), as amended.
5. Add § 147.108 to read as follows:
§ 147.108
Prohibition of preexisting condition exclusions.
(a)
No preexisting condition exclusions
—(1)
In general.
A …
91 FR 33900 — Federal Independent Dispute Resolution Operations IRCFinal Rules (FR)Jun 4, 2026
…the No Surprises Act.
U.S.C.-Brookings Schaeffer on Health Policy.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/usc-brookings-schaeffer-on-health-policy/2021/03/16/recommendations-for-implementing-the-no-surprises-act/.
Back to Citation
340.
See,
for example, the proposed 2027 HHS notice of benefit and payment parameters (9…
Joint BoardRegulationsDec 30, 2016related by meaning
(h) (h) Effective/applicability date. This section is generally applicable beginning June 12, 2014, except that paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section are applicable beginning August 2, 2011.
Joint BoardRegulationsOct 11, 2017related by meaning
(b) (b) Effective/applicability date. This section is applicable to conduct occurring on or after September 26, 2007.
IRCCourt RulingsMay 28, 2003related by meaning
r the Northern District of
Illinois, in which petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of
obstructing and impeding the due administration of the Code in violation of section 7212(a).
3
- 6 -
3
(...continued)
corruptly or by force or threats of force (including
any threatening letter or communication) endeavors to
intimid…
IRCCourt RulingsFeb 29, 2012related by meaning
Sav. Bank v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc:, 530 U.S. 238, 254 (2000) (quoting
Hughes Aircraft Co. v. Jacobson', 525 U.S. 432, 438 (1999)). Similarly, the Supreme Court has stated that "where the language of an enactment is clear, and
construction according to its terms does not lead to absurd or impracticable
consequences…
IRCCourt RulingsJul 31, 2000related by meaning
lated penalty are met,
a taxpayer in a test case is just as negligent as the taxpayers
who have agreed to be bound by the resolution of the test case. We conclude that each of petitioners is liable for the
accuracy-related penalties determined by respondent.
8. Addition to Tax for Failure To File Timely
Lakewood filed …
IRCCourt RulingsSep 29, 2022related by meaning
at trial that he had filed a return for 2012 showing tax due.
Although his 2013 account transcript r eflects a withholding credit of $320 , petitioner has neither argued nor shown that his 2013 withholding equaled or exceeded the
amount of tax shown on his 2012 return. As for 2014, petitioner’s required annual
payment …