AB 2363 amends Section 61020 of the Revenue and Taxation Code to add a new exemption from the Individual Shared Responsibility Penalty: a responsible individual is not subject to the penalty for any month if the applicable household member was enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025. The rest of §61020 — the affordability, income, and gross income thresholds that already create exemptions — remains intact.
The change carves out a time‑bounded, enrollment‑based exemption that will reduce penalty exposure for households with Medi‑Cal coverage in one of those two years. Practically, the bill shifts a verification and compliance question to the Franchise Tax Board (FTB) and raises implementation issues around data sharing with state Medi‑Cal records and the operational scope of retroactive relief.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill adds subdivision (d) to §61020, barring the FTB from imposing the Individual Shared Responsibility Penalty for any month if the applicable household member was enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025. It does not change the existing affordability or income exemptions in subdivisions (a)–(c).
Who It Affects
Directly affects California taxpayers subject to the individual mandate penalty and households with at least one member enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025. It also implicates state agencies that administer coverage and tax enforcement, primarily the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and the Franchise Tax Board.
Why It Matters
This is a narrow, year‑specific exemption that can erase penalty liabilities for many low‑income Californians who were on Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025 but otherwise lacked continuous minimum essential coverage. The provision requires verification of past Medi‑Cal enrollment, which creates operational and legal questions about retroactivity, data sharing, and administrative cost.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 2363 amends California’s Individual Shared Responsibility framework by inserting an additional exemption into Revenue & Taxation Code §61020. Under current law, the FTB may impose a penalty on responsible individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage for a month, subject to several affordability and income-based exemptions.
The bill adds a new, discrete exemption: if the applicable household member was enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025, the FTB may not impose the penalty for that month.
The statutory text links the exemption to an "applicable household member," the existing statutory term used throughout §61020 to determine who counts for coverage and penalty purposes. The bill does not alter how the penalty is calculated, nor does it change the affordability test or the income thresholds already listed in the statute.
Instead, it functions as an additional route to avoid the penalty based solely on documented Medi‑Cal enrollment in either of the two specified calendar years.Because the language says the penalty "shall not be imposed on a responsible individual for a month in which ... the applicable household member ... was enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025," the provision raises practical questions about the time frame to which it applies and how FTB will verify enrollment. The FTB will need access to Medi‑Cal enrollment records for 2024–2025 to apply the exemption, and that creates a data‑sharing and administrative workload that the bill does not fund or expressly authorize.
The law leaves intact FTB’s existing role in determining and collecting penalties but changes the universe of months for which a penalty may lawfully be assessed.For taxpayers, the immediate effect is relief: households with a member enrolled in Medi‑Cal during either 2024 or 2025 will have months exempted from potential penalty exposure. For the state, the change reduces the pool of assessable penalties for cases tied to those Medi‑Cal enrollment years and forces agencies to reconcile tax enforcement with Medi‑Cal enrollment records from those specific years.
The Five Things You Need to Know
AB 2363 amends Revenue & Taxation Code §61020 by adding subdivision (d) to create a new exemption based on Medi‑Cal enrollment in 2024 or 2025.
The exemption applies at the month level: if the applicable household member was enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025, the FTB may not impose the Individual Shared Responsibility Penalty for that month.
The bill does not change existing affordability or income exemptions in §61020(a)–(c) and does not alter how the penalty amount is calculated.
The text identifies no appropriations or implementation funding and does not specify a verification process or required data exchange between DHCS and the FTB.
The statutory trigger is enrollment in exactly two calendar years (2024 and 2025); the bill does not extend the exemption to Medi‑Cal enrollment in any other years.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Adds a Medi‑Cal enrollment exemption to the list of penalty exemptions
The single amendment in the bill inserts a new subdivision (d) into §61020. That subdivision provides that the Individual Shared Responsibility Penalty shall not be imposed for a month if the applicable household member was enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025. Practically, this is an additive exemption: it sits alongside the statute’s existing affordability and income‑based exemptions and expands the categories of months the FTB cannot assess.
Enrollment in 2024 or 2025 is a categorical, time‑limited exemption
The new language is categorical and limited to two calendar years. It ties penalty relief to a binary enrollment fact — whether the household member was enrolled in Medi‑Cal in either 2024 or 2025 — rather than to income, cost, or coverage duration. That structure simplifies qualification in one sense (look for enrollment records) but creates ambiguity about which months are relieved and whether partial‑year Medi‑Cal enrollment suffices.
Leaves existing affordability and income tests unchanged
AB 2363 does not amend the affordability threshold (the percentage test), the applicable household income exclusions, or the low‑income/gross income cutoffs already codified in subdivisions (a)–(c). Those rules remain alternative bases for exemption; the Medi‑Cal enrollment clause simply provides an additional, independent basis to avoid the penalty.
Places verification and operational demands on FTB and coverage agencies
Although the bill does not include procedural text, its operation depends on the FTB determining past Medi‑Cal enrollment. That raises administrative questions: how FTB will access DHCS records, whether monthly or annual enrollment data will be used, and who bears the cost of the data match. The amendment does not authorize or appropriate funds for those tasks, so implementation will require agencies to define processes within existing resources.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Californians enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025 — They gain a statutory bar to penalty assessment for months covered by the exemption, reducing tax liabilities tied to the individual mandate.
- Low‑income households with intermittent coverage — Households that had gaps in commercial or Exchange coverage but did have Medi‑Cal enrollment in 2024/2025 will avoid penalties they otherwise might have owed.
- Taxpayers represented by advocates and preparers — Tax professionals and legal aid organizations can use a clear, documentable enrollment fact to secure relief without navigating affordability calculations.
Who Bears the Cost
- Franchise Tax Board — FTB must adjust assessment and verification processes and perform enrollment data checks against Medi‑Cal records without an express appropriation for new work.
- Department of Health Care Services and DHCS data systems — DHCS will likely need to respond to requests or set up data exchanges to confirm 2024–2025 enrollment, creating operational workload.
- State budget (penalty receipts) — The state will forgo some penalty revenue attributable to households meeting the Medi‑Cal enrollment condition, shifting baseline collections downward absent offsets.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between simple, targeted relief for low‑income Californians and the administrative and equity costs of a narrow, year‑bound exemption: it helps a clearly identifiable group using an easily verifiable fact (enrollment in 2024 or 2025), but it shifts verification burdens to agencies without funding and creates arbitrary disparities for similar households with Medi‑Cal enrollment outside those two years.
The bill creates a clean, administrable eligibility criterion on its face — documented Medi‑Cal enrollment in 2024 or 2025 — but it leaves critical implementation details unspecified. First, the statute does not define whether a single day of Medi‑Cal enrollment in those years suffices or whether continuous or monthly enrollment is required to trigger the exemption.
That ambiguity will drive administrative rulemaking or litigation about the scope of "enrolled in Medi‑Cal in 2024 or 2025." Second, the amendment appears to operate retroactively insofar as it bars imposition of the penalty for months that may predate 2024; the statute does not limit the months to which the bar applies. Agencies will need to decide whether the exemption covers months across the entire individual mandate period or only months in 2024–2025.
Operationally, the change forces a technical data‑matching task: the FTB must verify enrollment statuses from Medi‑Cal databases. The bill supplies no funding or process for that work, and state privacy and data‑sharing rules will influence how quickly and cheaply the verification can occur.
Finally, the decision to limit relief to two calendar years raises policy equity questions: households with equivalent circumstances but Medi‑Cal enrollment in other years gain no relief, producing a winners‑and‑losers outcome tied to timing rather than need or income.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.