HSAs vs HRAs (Savings Accounts vs Reimbursement Arrangements)

New Call to action

SUBSCRIBE

The Zane Employee Health Benefits blog covers all of employee health benefits - Defined Contribution, private exchanges, individual health insurance, small business health benefits, HRA, and premium reimbursements. Join thousands of others and subscribe now!

Subscribe to RSS feed Add us on Facebook! Follow us on Twitter

Subscribe by email

Your email:

Search

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

HSAs vs HRAs (Savings Accounts vs Reimbursement Arrangements)

 

For Most Businesses, HRAs are Superior to HSAs

Which is better: A Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) or a Health Savings Account
hra vs hsa (HSA)
? The answer depends on what you are trying to accomplish and whether you are an employer or an employee.

HRA vs HSA - What is a Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA)?

A Health Reimbursement Arrangement, or HRA, is notional account that employers use to reimburse employees’ healthcare expenses. Funds do not accumulate in a separate account; rather, employers pay only after their employees incur expenses.

HRA vs HSA - What is a Health Savings Account (HSA)? 

A Health Savings Account, or HSA, is a financial account established by an individual to pay for qualified medical expenses. HSAs must be linked with a qualified high-deductible health insurance plan, and anyone can contribute to it.

HRA vs HSA - Which One is Right for Your Business? 

Several characteristics make HRAs superior for employers, while still benefiting employees. HSAs generally favor employees but are more costly to employers. Here are key similarities and differences you should remember:

HRA vs HSA - Similarities

Employer contributions to both HRAs and HSAs are tax-deductible. Employees aren’t taxed on these contributions: Employer HRA contributions are excluded from wages, while employees deduct HSA contributions on their personal tax returns.

Both HRAs and HSAs encourage employee "consumerism," helping them pay attention to healthcare costs and use healthcare more prudently. They’re rewarded by having unused funds roll forward each year.

Generally, HRAs are better for employers while still very beneficial for employees. To make the right decision, however, you need to understand the key differences between HRAs and HSAs.

HRA vs HSA - Important Differences

The differences between HRAs and HSAs relate to control, flexibility, and simplicity.

Control. Employers have more control over costs with HRAs. Only employers may contribute to HRAs and use these funds to reimburse actual expenses; with HSAs contributions are made whether or not expenses are incurred. Employers also have more freedom to select expenses covered by HRAs. Employees forfeit unused HRA funds when they change jobs but keep all unused HSA employer contributions.

Flexibility. With HRAs, employers can adjust contributions by class of employee (e.g. management, IT, clerical). HRAs can be used with any type of health insurance—or none at all. Additionally, HRAs are easier to use in conjunction with other employee benefits like cafeteria plans and FSAs.

Simplicity. HRAs are easier to understand, administer and manage. Employees don’t have to store receipts for multiple years, worry about tax deductions or pay monthly administrative fees to their bank or broker.

 

Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA)

Health Savings Account (HSA)

Control

Employers pay when expense is incurred, and only to extent of contributions

Employer pays full amount at beginning of year, whether or not expenses are incurred.

Funds stay with the employer when the employee leaves the company.

Funds go with the employee when he/she leaves the company.

Only employers may contribute.

Employers, employees or third parties may contribute.

Flexibility

Employer selects maximum contribution.

IRS determines maximum contribution.

No restrictions on health insurance.

Must be paired with qualified high deductible plan.

Contributions vary by class of employee.

All employees receive same employer contribution.

May be used with FSA with few restrictions.

May be used only with restricted, limited-purpose FSA.

Simplicity

Funds paid from company bank account.

Employee sets up account with bank or brokerage and has separate policy with insurance company.

Employee submits receipts for payment.

Employee manages account and submits expenses for payment.

Rules driven by broad IRS guidelines and company plan design.

Complex IRS regulations govern expenses, funding, participation and fiduciary requirements.


The best-in-class hra software platforms provide the flexibility to create and administer separate employee classes, choose what expenses you’ll cover, control how much you’ll pay and accommodate different health plans and carriers. It lets you create electronic plan documents and communicate your new plan. It also ensures your plan will be fully compliant with all regulations.

HRAs are easier to understand, administer and manage. Employees don’t have to store receipts for multiple years, worry about tax deductions or pay monthly administrative fees to their bank or broker. 

With HRAs, employers can adjust contributions by class of employee (e.g. management, IT, clerical). HRAs can be used with any type of health insurance—or none at all. Additionally, HRAs are easier to use in conjunction with other employee benefits like cafeteria plans and FSAs.

What do you think?

hra whitepaper 101

Note: This should not be taken as legal or tax advice.

subscribetoblogctablue
Tags: ,

Comments

I have looked into HRA's and HSA'S and have exclusively sold HSA's for totally different reasons with finominal success. The Money in an HSA account is the employees and the employee is very probably going to treat it that way. HRA dollars are use it or lose it and there are few employees that won't use something they are going to lose. It is interesting to note that on an average year approximately 25-30% of our clients receive a rate pass or have a rate reduction. Keep you HRA's we love HSA's and more importantly so do our clients.  
Thanks for your thoughts however as there are those employers may prefer trying to keep the leftover funds and not let their employees be rewarded for good Heath behavior a benefit for them that they can use in retirement to pay ongoing medical bills, LTC, Medicare etc still tax free. 
Best regards 
Garry Johnson 
Garry Johnson
Posted @ Saturday, March 24, 2012 11:41 PM by Garry Johnson
I agree with Garry's statement 100%!
Posted @ Sunday, March 25, 2012 8:03 AM by June Busby
First and foremost, if a client is having success with an HSA/Group combo (e.g. escaping rate increases), don't fix what "ain't" broken.  
 
However, HRAs are almost always better "tax vehicles" for employers due the reasons outlined in this post. HSAs may be better for employees for the reasons you mention. That's why a company should offer both - I have both :). See FAQ: Can I have an HRA and an HSA at the same time?  
 
<< HRA dollars are use it or lose it and there are few employees that won't use something they are going to lose.>> This is not necessarily true. The employer can set the HRA to accumulate year over year just like an HSA. The catch, though, is if the employee leaves the company (i.e. terminates), the employer keeps the money. Remember, this is an employee health benefit with the purpose of recruiting and retention. E.g. A $10,000 slush fund for medical/dental expenses in an HRA that you lose if you leave is a major retention incentive.  
 
I agree that HSAs are 100% better for employees if the company offers a group health plan because they keep the money if they leave the company. However, HRAs are (almost) always a better option for employees if the company does not offer group health benefits. This is because HRAs can reimburse employees for their out-of-pocket health insurance premiums and HSAs cannot.  
 
Again, the "best" solution is for the employer to offer both using an HSA compatibility feature. See FAQ: Can I have an HRA and an HSA at the same time?
Posted @ Sunday, March 25, 2012 11:09 AM by Rick Lindquist
Sorry for all of the duplicate comments. I was having trouble with the new comment system.
Posted @ Sunday, March 25, 2012 11:10 AM by Rick Lindquist
Both forms are mostly dependent on added employer funding on top the cost of the major medical plan. This has reached a terminal decision point. If employers drop out of the game the system will crash. The consumerism premise is virtually non existent and neither a hra or a hsa have any effect on large claims. Remember MSA's?
Posted @ Sunday, March 25, 2012 11:34 AM by george
In 2014, HRAs (since they are not dependent on an underlying medical plan) are going to become mostly a tax-advantaged medical expense reimbursement account for the purposes recruiting and retention with tax-free health benefits. And, consumerism (hdhp/hsa/bronze plan), medical transparency, managed care (aco), etc. will affect claims via the "new" individual insurance market. 
 
HSAs, on the other hand, are going to become an ancillary sale to the insurance on an individual basis. Most consumers will gravitate to the "bronze" high deductible plan and HSAs (assuming they don't already have sufficient employer HRA funds) may become vital to help the individual self-insure the deductible and become a true "consumer" in the health care market).  
 
Of course, this is only my opinion - I welcome everyone to poke as many holes as you can.
Posted @ Sunday, March 25, 2012 11:48 AM by Rick Lindquist
I agree with Garry as well- even though he has poor grammar and spelling ("finominal" really?)...
Posted @ Monday, May 07, 2012 10:33 AM by ChuckD
I am sorry, but a lot of the information in this article/post is not accurate when it comes to HSAs. The employer does NOT have to fund anything at all, (ever) but if they choose to they can do it on whatever schedule they would like as long as each employee receives the same amount of dollars per their coverage category (single vs family for example) at the same time. Also, employees never "submit" anything for reimbursement -- they simply pay the bill (over time if necessary based on funds available) or pick up the RX; this is with debit cards, checks, or online bill pay. Unlike an HRA, there is no need for the additional cost to the employer of a TPA with HSAs. What employees and employers alike have to do is make sure they are working with a reputable bank who understands HSAs,does good education, and has good client support (both for the individual employee as well as the employer group / HR folks).
Posted @ Tuesday, June 26, 2012 3:59 PM by Paula Colling
Paula - this was written based on the assumption the employer is considering contributing to either an HRA or HSA?  
 
What specifically is inaccurate in the post? Please use quotes and we will do our best to address your concerns.
Posted @ Tuesday, June 26, 2012 6:06 PM by Rick Lindquist
The quotes from your post regarding HSAs that are inaccurate include: 
 
 
 
"Employer pays full amount at beginning of year, whether or not expenses are incurred." 
 
 
 
FALSE. The employer can fund any amount, at any time, as long as comparability rules are followed. ALSO, they DO NOT have to fund anything at all - ever. 
 
 
 
"All employees receive same employer contribution." 
 
 
 
FALSE. Employees in the same benefit class recivee the same (eg - family vs single) and those who are compensated at lower rates may actually be given more than those at higher rates of compensation. 
 
 
 
"Employee sets up account with bank or brokerage and has separate policy with insurance company." 
 
 
 
THIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. the employee does set up the account, but many employers choose to use one bank for ease of use in general. If they are making a contribution on behalf of the employees, they (the company) can dictate the bank that they will use. Employees can then contribute to that same account, tranfer the funds, or set up a separate account for payroll deduct. I don't know what you mean by the comment about a "separate policy" ?? 
 
 
 
"Employee manages account and submits expenses for payment." 
 
 
 
TRUE AND FALSE. The employee does manage their account (it's a checking account and they OWN it) but they never submit anything to anyone for reimbursement. The whole point of the HSA is control by the consumer (ergo, managing their own healthcare dollars and bringing down costs). The employee simply pays the bills after the final network discount, (whether they do so in a lump sum or with a payment arrangement) just like any other patient would. They have a debit card that they swipe, or use over the phone with a provider, most times they have access to checks, or online bill pay -- because it is a checking account. No one ever has to go through the reimbursement process, thus saving the employer $$$ and time on a TPA. 
 
 
 
"Complex IRS regulations govern expenses, funding, participation and fiduciary requirements." 
 
 
 
FALSE. These accounts are not hard to understand, if adequate attention is paid to basic employee education up front. These are checking accounts, and the bank that admins them does the fiduciary follow up. ALL an employer has to provide is information regarding contributions to the payroll provider or through the same internal mechanism they might use for 401k contributions if they do their own payroll. No additional oversight of employees, co costly TPA services.  
 
 
 
 
 
In closing, I would LOVE to write for you in future because I personally work with several hundred employers across the country who are huge fans of HSAs, and who have had much more combersome experiences with HRAs. In fact, many of the clients I have came to us off an HRA arrangement that did little or nothing to help get their employees to engage as consumers. These same folks are seeing better wellness #'s, and better overall employee underdstanding of their benefits as a result of a CDHP with an HSA. For these folks, it is no longer a $25 decision based on a lack of understanding. It is now shopping with empowerment and a realization that they are much more in control than they thought. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Posted @ Tuesday, July 17, 2012 10:57 AM by Paula
Can HSA funds cover lingering medical bills from previous year?
Posted @ Thursday, December 06, 2012 7:53 AM by David
yes
Posted @ Thursday, December 06, 2012 8:16 AM by Rick Lindquist
Where is the proof that HSA can cover previous year bills? 
I have a $2100 bill with my hospital. They will accept $200 per month and will keep the account in house. If I want to pay less than that per month then the hospital can set up a payment arrangement with a bill collector that charges 1.5% interest and then I could pay $60 per month. Are both situations eligible for HSA payments? How can I answer similar questions like this on my own?
Posted @ Thursday, December 06, 2012 8:45 AM by David
Hi David,  
 
See Publication 969 for an overview of the tax rules that apply to HSAs.  
 
Another resource would be to contact your HSA provider (as they would be able to give you more specific advice to your situation). I use Health Equity for my HSA.
Posted @ Thursday, December 06, 2012 9:14 AM by Rick Lindquist
Hi David -- here are the rules: 
As long as you had both the qualified HDHP coverage, and had opened and funded the HSA (amount does not matter) when the medical procedure was done/RX's purchased, etc. you may use HSA dollars for prior year expenses. That is actually one of the best features about them. Pub 969 is a wonderful tool and it will assist w/ details. 
Posted @ Thursday, December 06, 2012 2:11 PM by P.A. Colling
Can this work? 
Employer's offers HDHP to all employees. Family deductible = $10,000. Employee pays the first $4000, then the Employer will pay up to $6k via an HRA to get to the $10k. 
At the same time, the Cafeteria plan allows Employees to fully contribute to their HSAs. All leagal?
Posted @ Saturday, January 19, 2013 4:16 PM by Corky Bradley
Yes - That should work (assuming the max out-of-pocket was less than $12,100). (Note: health plans for small businesses are barred from charging deductibles greater than $2,000 per year for individual coverage or $4,000 per year for family coverage starting in 2014 (this amount will be annually adjusted for inflation).  
 
See http://www.zanebenefits.com/blog/bid/97341/FAQ-Can-I-have-an-HRA-and-an-HSA-at-the-same-time for more information on how an HRA and HSA work together
Posted @ Sunday, January 20, 2013 10:16 AM by Rick Lindquist
Rick wrote:(Note: health plans for small businesses are barred from charging deductibles greater than $2,000 per year for individual coverage or $4,000 per year for family coverage starting in 2014) I don't think this applies to firms that are 'grandfathered' in. Our deductible is $10k for families. True?
Posted @ Sunday, January 20, 2013 5:18 PM by Corky Bradley
Also, if you review http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p969.pdf it would appear that our proposed HRA would not allow HSA contributions, even if defined as "HSA-qualified" per your website. Correct?? Thanks!
Posted @ Monday, January 21, 2013 9:46 AM by Corky Bradley
I believe Plans lose grandfathered status in 2014. 
 
<<Also, if you review http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p969.pdf it would appear that our proposed HRA would not allow HSA contributions, even if defined as "HSA-qualified" per your website. Correct?? Thanks!>> The proposed design should work, as long as you make the HRA HSA-compatible. See http://www.zanebenefits.com/blog/bid/97341/FAQ-Can-I-have-an-HRA-and-an-HSA-at-the-same-time 
Posted @ Monday, January 21, 2013 5:08 PM by Rick Lindquist
Neither one is a very viable option for a small business of 6 employees who operates quarter to quarter based on horrid economic times!
Posted @ Wednesday, April 03, 2013 3:11 PM by Janice
I am considering a job with an employer that offers both an HSA and an HRA. They describe the HRA as "50% employer funded" which I don't understand. Everything I am reading states that only the employer can contribute to an HRA. What questions should I ask to clarify what is being offered? 
Thanks to anyone who responds!
Posted @ Wednesday, April 10, 2013 7:55 AM by Linda
Hi Linda, 
Thanks for your comment. I would recommend confirming with the company. It could be that their HRA has a 50% co-insurance (they will reimburse you 50% of your medical expenses).  
 
This post might be helpful; it explains different ways an HRA can be set up: 
http://www.zanebenefits.com/blog/bid/273643/Health-Reimbursement-Arrangements-and-Plan-Design
Posted @ Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:47 PM by Christina Merhar
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

More Info
Product
Customers
Across the Web
Contact Us
Disclaimer: The information provided on this website is general in nature and does not apply to any specific U.S. state except where noted. Health insurance regulations differ in each state. See a licensed agent for detailed information on your state. Zane Benefits, Inc. does not sell health insurance.