How to sign up for Medicare

Richard Howard55 said:Thanks, unknown 🙂

🎉🎉

How’s the employee registration process looking lately? I haven’t had to onboard or offboard anyone in about six months.
I see that filing with NOAA is sufficient.
But for Medicare, do I just need to have a registered application on file?

1. One of my employees had a contract expire on September 30th, 2014. Since the new labor laws just kicked in, I’m not sure if I can re-register them for a fixed-term contract, or if I even need to report that to NOAA.
2. What’s the standard procedure now when we’re enrolling someone on a fixed-term basis for the first time under the updated IRS guidelines?
3. When we extend an existing fixed-term agreement, do we need to notify NOAA, and do we have to provide a reason for the extension?

Sorry to be a nuisance; you guys have probably already covered this in previous threads...

Jose Turner57 said:How’s the employee registration process looking lately? I haven’t had to onboard or offboard anyone in about six months.
I see that filing with NOAA is sufficient.
But for Medicare, do I just need to have a registered application on file?

1. One of my employees had a contract expire on September 30th, 2014. Since the new labor laws just kicked in, I’m not sure if I can re-register them for a fixed-term contract, or if I even need to report that to NOAA.
2. What’s the standard procedure now when we’re enrolling someone on a fixed-term basis for the first time under the updated IRS guidelines?
3. When we extend an existing fixed-term agreement, do we need to notify NOAA, and do we have to provide a reason for the extension?

Sorry to be a nuisance; you guys have probably already covered this in previous threads...

😛

Jose Turner57 said:How’s the employee registration process looking lately? I haven’t had to onboard or offboard anyone in about six months.
I see that filing with NOAA is sufficient.
But for Medicare, do I just need to have a registered application on file?

1. One of my employees had a contract expire on September 30th, 2014. Since the new labor laws just kicked in, I’m not sure if I can re-register them for a fixed-term contract, or if I even need to report that to NOAA.
2. What’s the standard procedure now when we’re enrolling someone on a fixed-term basis for the first time under the updated IRS guidelines?
3. When we extend an existing fixed-term agreement, do we need to notify NOAA, and do we have to provide a reason for the extension?

Sorry to be a nuisance; you guys have probably already covered this in previous threads...

Using the Medicare application isn't strictly mandatory, though it is practical for several reasons—one being that you receive the registration/de-registration forms via email. If you don't use the application, you must physically go to the service counter with a completed form to have it verified, as you need official proof of the registration or de-registration.
It is true that emails can take some time to arrive, but they eventually do. If you are de-registering an employee, they can actually head straight to the service counter without waiting for your paperwork to claim unemployment benefits; they don't necessarily have to wait for your confirmation.

1. You really need to clarify this point. You are likely concerned about the specific IRS provisions regarding the time limits on such contracts. Since you know how long the previous contract lasted, perhaps you should review that specific section of the law.

2. Registering an employee on a fixed-term basis with NOAA is handled exactly as it was before—just the standard M1P form and nothing more. The IRS did not introduce any changes regarding that specific procedure.

3. Extending a fixed-term contract does not require reporting to NOAA. If one contract ends on September 30 and the next begins on October 1, you simply draft the new contract; you don't submit anything to them—neither the contract nor a change form—because technically, no change has occurred. However, if a contract transitions into a permanent position, or if there is a change in working hours (full-time vs. part-time), then a notification of change is required.
Regarding the explanation you asked about: that detail is vital to include within the contract itself. You must provide a solid justification for why the work is fixed-term and for the subsequent extension. NOAA has no involvement in that matter.

Robert Sanchez6, you really nailed the explanation there. Thanks so much for breaking it all down.

I was scrolling through some IRS guidelines last night regarding independent contractor agreements, and I stumbled upon exactly what you mentioned. You can't just claim an "increased workload" as a catch-all excuse to justify those types of contracts or extensions anymore; there actually has to be a solid, well-documented reason behind it. It looks like we've officially moved into a whole different area of complexity.

Jose Turner57 said:Robert Sanchez6, you really nailed the explanation there. Thanks so much for breaking it all down.

I was scrolling through some IRS guidelines last night regarding independent contractor agreements, and I stumbled upon exactly what you mentioned. You can't just claim an "increased workload" as a catch-all excuse to justify those types of contracts or extensions anymore; there actually has to be a solid, well-documented reason behind it. It looks like we've officially moved into a whole different area of complexity.

The reason has to be stated within the contract itself, but I couldn't find anything explicitly saying that specific reasoning *must* be detailed. Got a link?

David Green642 said:The reason has to be stated within the contract itself, but I couldn't find anything explicitly saying that specific reasoning *must* be detailed. Got a link?

That’s exactly where her logic was heading—thinking there has to be an objective justification for extending the term. Essentially, you can't just say "we have more work to do," because if that's the case, the law expects you to transition that role into a permanent position. It has to be something situational. For instance, you might need extra coverage because someone is out on maternity leave, or perhaps you're scaling up for a seasonal rush, like needing extra hands at a beachfront restaurant during the summer peak, and you only need them until the season winds down. I actually saw some of my own clients get hit with a massive fine from the Department of Labor because they extended a contract citing "increased workload" as the excuse. They refused to admit they were wrong, but the regulators weren't having it.

Brenda Chase3 said:That’s exactly where her logic was heading—thinking there has to be an objective justification for extending the term. Essentially, you can't just say "we have more work to do," because if that's the case, the law expects you to transition that role into a permanent position. It has to be something situational. For instance, you might need extra coverage because someone is out on maternity leave, or perhaps you're scaling up for a seasonal rush, like needing extra hands at a beachfront restaurant during the summer peak, and you only need them until the season winds down. I actually saw some of my own clients get hit with a massive fine from the Department of Labor because they extended a contract citing "increased workload" as the excuse. They refused to admit they were wrong, but the regulators weren't having it.

I've had audits based on increased workload before, and nobody ever gave me grief about it. It's a gray area, honestly. In my view, you just need to back up that reason with actual accounting docs—something showing a spike in revenue or even just expenses, you know?

Otherwise, how is an inspector supposed to dispute anything just because they have a hunch? That's just pointless...

David Green642 said:I've had audits based on increased workload before, and nobody ever gave me grief about it. It's a gray area, honestly. In my view, you just need to back up that reason with actual accounting docs—something showing a spike in revenue or even just expenses, you know?

Otherwise, how is an inspector supposed to dispute anything just because they have a hunch? That's just pointless...

Their official response was basically: "If your business volume has increased, then hire someone on a permanent contract. If things slow down later, you can just lay them off due to downsizing."
Can you believe that? Honestly, it feels like every inspector in the US just makes up their own rules as they go. Because if you look at audits for other companies, nothing is ever questioned, even when the documentation is identical to what these people were penalized for.
These guys were hit with a fine of $1667, but the court actually reduced it to $533 because it was a first-time offense, they're a major corporation, they've always been compliant, and they pay everything on time. So, the court showed some leniency.
I totally get where you're coming from, but in the real world, things work a bit differently.

Brenda Chase3 said:Their official response was basically: "If your business volume has increased, then hire someone on a permanent contract. If things slow down later, you can just lay them off due to downsizing."
Can you believe that? Honestly, it feels like every inspector in the US just makes up their own rules as they go. Because if you look at audits for other companies, nothing is ever questioned, even when the documentation is identical to what these people were penalized for.
These guys were hit with a fine of $1667, but the court actually reduced it to $533 because it was a first-time offense, they're a major corporation, they've always been compliant, and they pay everything on time. So, the court showed some leniency.
I totally get where you're coming from, but in the real world, things work a bit differently.

I’d ask them then: what does an increased workload have to do with hiring someone permanently? The whole point of a temporary contract is that the workload increases for a specific, time-limited period. And once that's over, it might decrease—or it might not.

If I were in court, I’d absolutely tear them apart using objective data to prove the workload increase—there shouldn't even be room for debate. If the regulations actually stated this clearly, everything would be crystal clear.

Inspectors are honestly just incompetent. A total disaster.

I need to register an employee with today's date through Medicare, but I don't have her Social Security number handy. Is it possible to get the filing through without the SSN today? If not, could I file tomorrow but backdate it to today? Also, besides filling out the application for a fixed-term contract, is there anything else I need to upload?

Jose Turner57 said:I need to register an employee with today's date through Medicare, but I don't have her Social Security number handy. Is it possible to get the filing through without the SSN today? If not, could I file tomorrow but backdate it to today? Also, besides filling out the application for a fixed-term contract, is there anything else I need to upload?

It works fine without the Social Security number. You can file up to one day in arrears, which means you can definitely submit it tomorrow using today's date.
There isn't anything else you need to upload. 😉

Hey guys, I could really use some help here

So, I’m the only employee at my place, and it’s been about 10 days since I officially registered the business and got myself on the books with Medicare... but they told me I don't actually *have* to sign up for health coverage, though apparently "if I want to, I can"?!
Naturally, I didn't bother signing up, but now I'm looking at my status and it still shows me as unemployed under the health system.
Does this whole automatic enrollment thing actually work, or is Medicare going to just register me whenever they feel like it? And what happens if I suddenly need to take sick leave and the system thinks I'm just some jobless person wandering around?!

P.S. I don't even have one of those digital health apps or anything, I just grabbed a physical form and filed it with Medicare, so now I'm sitting here wondering if the paperwork is actually going to make its way over to the main office without a massive headache...

redsurfer61 said:Hey guys, I could really use some help here

So, I’m the only employee at my place, and it’s been about 10 days since I officially registered the business and got myself on the books with Medicare... but they told me I don't actually *have* to sign up for health coverage, though apparently "if I want to, I can"?!
Naturally, I didn't bother signing up, but now I'm looking at my status and it still shows me as unemployed under the health system.
Does this whole automatic enrollment thing actually work, or is Medicare going to just register me whenever they feel like it? And what happens if I suddenly need to take sick leave and the system thinks I'm just some jobless person wandering around?!

P.S. I don't even have one of those digital health apps or anything, I just grabbed a physical form and filed it with Medicare, so now I'm sitting here wondering if the paperwork is actually going to make its way over to the main office without a massive headache...

The information they gave you is correct—you don't need to visit the insurance office manually because the update should happen automatically. However, Medicare takes much longer to process things than the Department of Labor does. If you need physical proof right away, your best bet is to grab a processed form from the Social Security Administration and head down to the Medicare office to fill out Form 1; they can confirm your status there.

Bottom line: you will eventually be enrolled with Medicare, you just need to be patient. Since you aren't using the online portal, you won't receive their digital confirmation, as they typically only email those documents to users with active online accounts.

Hey there!
I could really use some advice. I’m switching jobs, and since they’re in different states, the timing is a bit tricky. My current boss is offboarding me on Friday, December 19th, and I start at the new company that following Monday, December 22nd.
What happens during that weekend?
My current employer handles my Medicare deregistration on Friday. Can my new boss handle the enrollment later while things are processing, or does it have to be instant? I know there's usually a 24-hour window for payroll reporting—so if I show up Monday, am I technically just having a two-day gap? Or can my new boss backdate my start date to Sunday? Honestly, does those two days even matter?
Also, I need to swing by the Department of Justice on Friday to update my tax info since I'm moving to a new state... ugh, so much to do!🙂

Justin Fox4 said:Hey there!
I could really use some advice. I’m switching jobs, and since they’re in different states, the timing is a bit tricky. My current boss is offboarding me on Friday, December 19th, and I start at the new company that following Monday, December 22nd.
What happens during that weekend?
My current employer handles my Medicare deregistration on Friday. Can my new boss handle the enrollment later while things are processing, or does it have to be instant? I know there's usually a 24-hour window for payroll reporting—so if I show up Monday, am I technically just having a two-day gap? Or can my new boss backdate my start date to Sunday? Honestly, does those two days even matter?
Also, I need to swing by the Department of Justice on Friday to update my tax info since I'm moving to a new state... ugh, so much to do!🙂

Why is the weekend bothering you? Your old employer will offboard you on Friday the 19th, and then you start with the next company on Monday. That new employer will register you on either Monday or Tuesday, because they have a 24-hour window from your actual start date to get everything filed. If you start on the 22nd, they’ll file you on the 22nd or 23rd, but your official start date remains the 22nd.
There is no way the new employer would register you starting on the 20th if you aren't actually working until the 22nd.
Generally speaking, the 24-hour deadline refers to business days, not calendar days. So, technically, your old employer could process your exit on Monday instead of Friday if you finish up on Friday, since the weekend falls in between and the "24 hours" essentially spans Friday to Monday.
But practically, the new company just needs to have your paperwork submitted by Tuesday at the latest.

Thanks for the reply 😉
I can't figure out why I'm stressing over the weekend, because logically, everything makes sense. But honestly, I've been such a wreck lately since starting this new job, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised 😁
Thanks again 🙂

Section 112 is being updated to read:

"(1) Obligors shall submit data for maintaining master records within the following timeframes:

1. Data regarding the commencement, termination, or changes in the business operations of contribution obligors — within 24 hours of starting or ending operations, or on the date the decision to register or strike off becomes final in the appropriate registry, within 24 hours of any change occurring in the obligor's business operations.

4. Data regarding the start and end of coverage for self-employed obligors — within 24 hours of the registration decision becoming final in the appropriate registry.

(2) If an insured individual does not begin working on the start date of their coverage, the obligor is required to notify the Bureau of Writing no later than that same day.

(3) The Bureau of Writing is required to accept the application from paragraph 1 of this article and confirm receipt of the filing.

So, does anyone actually have real-world experience with this? Like—you finish the registration, then you handle the tax filings, then the bank, and so on... is 24 hours after registration really enough time to get everything sorted with Medicare? Honestly, they could have made it at least 3 days... this is just ridiculous. It’s like they have zero connection to reality—if a company can be set up online in a matter of hours, then fine, maybe those deadlines make sense, but right now? This feels like nothing more than a way to collect money through fines.👎

Carol Price4 said:Section 112 is being updated to read:

"(1) Obligors shall submit data for maintaining master records within the following timeframes:

1. Data regarding the commencement, termination, or changes in the business operations of contribution obligors — within 24 hours of starting or ending operations, or on the date the decision to register or strike off becomes final in the appropriate registry, within 24 hours of any change occurring in the obligor's business operations.

4. Data regarding the start and end of coverage for self-employed obligors — within 24 hours of the registration decision becoming final in the appropriate registry.

(2) If an insured individual does not begin working on the start date of their coverage, the obligor is required to notify the Bureau of Writing no later than that same day.

(3) The Bureau of Writing is required to accept the application from paragraph 1 of this article and confirm receipt of the filing.

So, does anyone actually have real-world experience with this? Like—you finish the registration, then you handle the tax filings, then the bank, and so on... is 24 hours after registration really enough time to get everything sorted with Medicare? Honestly, they could have made it at least 3 days... this is just ridiculous. It’s like they have zero connection to reality—if a company can be set up online in a matter of hours, then fine, maybe those deadlines make sense, but right now? This feels like nothing more than a way to collect money through fines.👎

They aren't exactly thinking clearly; I honestly don't see how anyone could squeeze all of that into a 24-hour window. Unless people are out there buying Superman capes so they can fly from one office to the next, it's impossible. Especially since those initial filings still have to be processed manually because they haven't approved digital access credentials or other similar nonsense yet.

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/example-link

This is going to be incredibly interesting to watch unfold! We're looking at a system where employees have to be registered before they even clock in for their first shift, and then the Social Security Administration has to be notified if someone changes their mind about the job... I am genuinely curious to see how the bureaucracy in this country actually manages to pull something like that off.