State RegulationsMA specificDifficulty 3/5
An employee of a small Massachusetts firm loses group health coverage through a qualifying event, and the firm is not subject to the federal COBRA continuation framework. Which statement is correct under Massachusetts law?
Select an option to reveal the answer and the full 3-part explanation — free, no signup.
Answer & full 3-part explanation (select an option above, or peek)
Why B is correct
Massachusetts fills the gap left by the federal COBRA continuation framework with its own continuation statute for small groups, M.G.L. c. 176J, § 9, administered and enforced by the Massachusetts Division of Insurance. Where an employer is not subject to the federal framework, the state statute supplies the continuation rights — with its own qualifying events, durations, and notice mechanics — so the qualified beneficiary is not left without recourse simply because the employer is small.
Why the other options are wrong
- A) Massachusetts law affirmatively provides continuation for small groups through M.G.L. c. 176J, § 9; the absence of the federal framework does not end continuation rights.
- C) The federal framework does not reach every employer; that is precisely why Massachusetts enacted its own small-group continuation statute.
- D) The state continuation obligation is statutory, not voluntary; M.G.L. c. 176J, § 9 imposes it on the small-group coverage.
Memory hook
When federal COBRA stops, Massachusetts continuation starts — small groups are not left empty-handed.