T
Therese
Guest
Short Term Disability Question
Wisconsin: Our employer has STD on all employees (66.66%)fully funded by the company. We have had a secondary insurance agency come in and sell STD's to several employees (40%) employee funded. The employees are having the premium deducted through payroll pre-tax. The employer is responsible for FICA and FUTA taxes after benefits are paid. This agency is acting as our administrator for our 125 cafeteria plan. Is it legal to have coverage for more than 100% of your income (STD coverage)? Are there any leagal discrepencies with this scenario?
[Edited by Therese on 07-17-2001 at 01:50 PM]
Wisconsin: Our employer has STD on all employees (66.66%)fully funded by the company. We have had a secondary insurance agency come in and sell STD's to several employees (40%) employee funded. The employees are having the premium deducted through payroll pre-tax. The employer is responsible for FICA and FUTA taxes after benefits are paid. This agency is acting as our administrator for our 125 cafeteria plan. Is it legal to have coverage for more than 100% of your income (STD coverage)? Are there any leagal discrepencies with this scenario?
[Edited by Therese on 07-17-2001 at 01:50 PM]