SIMERPU RESEARCH · SOURCE RECAP
Double-Dip Wellness Plans Abound Despite Clear Compliance Issues
SIMERPU recap and commentary: Mardy Gould
Opened — main text retrieved
Quick recap
Warns that wellness and indemnity programs promising tax savings may fail IRS requirements. Describes double-tax-benefit claims and possible employer/employee consequences.
SIMERPU’s viewpoint
Moreton’s article highlights why employer and employee outcomes should both be part of a proposal review. SIMERPU would ask how the claimed tax treatment affects each party and who handles an error or adjustment. Understanding those responsibilities is part of evaluating the program’s overall value.
What this source contributes
The article recognizes consequences for both employers and employees, broadening the discussion beyond employer savings.
What remains unanswered
The proposed allocation of administrative and financial responsibilities requires checking in the actual agreements.
Mardy Gould’s take
I would want both sides of the paycheck explained. What does the employer expect to gain, what does the employee receive and who handles a mistake? A useful proposal should address those questions openly. The employee’s understanding belongs in the review alongside the employer’s financial projection.
Questions I would bring to the conversation
1. How does the claimed treatment affect employer and employee separately?
2. Who handles payment or withholding errors?
3. What do the contracts actually promise if a problem arises?
Mardy Gould · Co-Founder, SIMERPU →
What would change our assessment?
Clear contractual responsibilities and verified payment mechanics would allow a more specific assessment than a general market warning.
Read the original source
The original author and publisher are credited below. Continue to their article, document or source page for the complete context.
Original Author: Emma Young
Publisher: Moreton & Company
Original Publication Date: 2026-07-29
Read this alongside…
Each connection has a specific purpose. Compare the sources’ facts, positions and publication dates as you read.
Revenue Ruling 2002-3 — Reimbursement of pre-tax health insurance premiums
IRS
Source position: Neutral / explanatory
Identify the original premium-reimbursement issue.
Read the SIMERPU recap →
CCA 201622031 — Tax Treatment of Wellness Program Benefits and Employer Reimbursement of Premiums Provided Pre-tax Under a Section 125 Cafeteria Plan
IRS Office of Chief Counsel
Source position: Neutral / explanatory
Compare reward and premium-return payments in later IRS advice.
Read the SIMERPU recap →
CCA 202323006 — Tax Treatment of Employer-Funded, Insured, Fixed-Indemnity Wellness Policy
IRS Office of Chief Counsel
Source position: Neutral / explanatory
Examine the recurring cash-payment facts underlying more recent concerns.
Read the SIMERPU recap →
Keep learning with SIMERPU
Build your understanding with learning resources, the free Professional Roadmap and our approach to reviewing sources.
About this source
Original Updated Date: Not stated
Source Type: Benefits consultant / administrator
Model Discussed: Double-dip wellness plans
Position: Critical
Period: Recent — 2023–2026
Retrieved: October 31, 2026
Research and date notes
No additional retrieval note.
Each record identifies the material retrieved. SIMERPU’s viewpoint and Mardy Gould’s take are editorial commentary; the source-position label describes the original source’s stance. Read the original and its qualifications when evaluating a particular arrangement.
SIMERP
U
™
Understand the details. Lead with confidence.
© 2026 SIMERPU.