Categories
Highlight

Enhanced Nursing Home Ownership Data Required by Biden HHS

From Bloomberg Law, by Tony Pugh:

  • The Biden administration finalized a rule requiring nursing homes to provide more detailed information about their ownership structure, including whether they are owned by private equity firms or real estate investment trusts (REITs). 
  • The additional data collected will be made public to allow families to make more informed choices about facilities and allow outside researchers to study the impact of different ownership models on quality of care.
  • Previous research has found that private equity ownership is associated with higher mortality rates for Medicare patients in nursing homes and increased taxpayer costs per resident. 
  • The private equity industry argues that its investments help strengthen struggling nursing homes by providing capital. 
  • The new rule implements requirements under the Affordable Care Act to increase transparency around nursing home ownership and oversight structures.
Categories
Alert

OIG Publishes a New Guidance Resource and a Report

OIG released our General Compliance Program Guidance (GCPG). The GCPG is a reference guide for the health care compliance community and other health care stakeholders. The GCPG provides information about relevant Federal laws, compliance program infrastructure, OIG resources, and other items useful for understanding health care compliance. The GCPG is voluntary guidance that discusses general compliance risks and compliance programs. The GCPG is not binding on any individual or entity. Download the guide in whole or access individual sections.

Categories
Health Law Highlights

Defending Executive Compensation in Nonprofit Health Care Systems

From American Health Law Association, by Albert Lin, Husch Blackwell LLP, and Connor Campbell, Weaver and Tidwell LLP:

This article reviews the rules surrounding the IRS principles of executive compensation with a focus on health care organizations and discusses best practices that the governing boards of such organizations should look for in exercising their fiduciary obligations to minimize issues with tax-exempt status.

State-Specific Requirements Impacting Executive Compensation

State-Specific Nonprofit Corporation Statutes and Applicable Requirements

  • Nonprofit health care organizations should maintain awareness of state-specific nonprofit requirements. These nonprofit requirements encompass both corporate governance requirements and tax-specific requirements based on income, property, and sales taxes that may not always correlate with federal tax concepts.
  • Texas has a common, specific type of nonprofit health organization that is specifically licensed by the Texas Medical Board as a legal entity that can practice medicine.
  • State statutes will usually have provisions directly impacting the payment of compensation.
  • As applied to executive compensation, an argument that a payment is a prohibited “distribution” is usually a key risk factor. The IRS rules prohibit a distribution of net earnings; state statutes may have slightly different language.
  • It is important to have awareness of whether state community benefit goals are met.

State Common Law Fiduciary Duties

  • In exercising their fiduciary duty and reviewing and approving compensation, directors should be mindful of their Duty of Care, Duty of Loyalty, and Duty of Obedience.

Federal Tax Law Requirements Impacting Executive Compensation

Private Benefit and Private Inurement

  • Federal tax concepts of private benefit and private inurement should always be on the minds of those establishing executive compensation for nonprofit organizations.
  • Private benefit refers to situations in which the overall resources of a charitable organization may benefit a general private interest rather than the public.
  • Private inurement prohibition is absolute and occurs when net earnings of a charitable organization are redirected to persons who are essentially in control or exercise control of the charitable organization (“insiders”).

Section 4958 Intermediate Sanctions

  • The intermediate sanctions penalize two key players: any disqualified person and any organization manager.
  • The defense to private inurement and the intermediate sanction regime the rebuttable presumption of “reasonable compensation.” This essentially shifts the burden of proof to the IRS in any contest over whether compensation was excessive.

21% Excise Tax on Compensation in Excess of $1M for Nonprofit Covered Employees

  • There is a 21% excise tax on the amount of compensation over $1 million as well as excess “parachute payments” paid to any “covered employees”.
  • There is also an exception for physicians and other providers, as amounts paid for medical services are disregarded for purposes of the $1 million excise tax threshold.

Recommended Best Practices on Executive Compensation for Nonprofit Health Care Boards

Monitor Legal Developments Contemporaneously Document Facts and Circumstances Supporting Both Reasonableness of Compensation and Community Need

  • The analysis conducted by the compensation committee should be written up in the form of minutes or internal memoranda.
  • An independent third-party compensation study can be critical in providing evidence in support of meeting the burden of proof and assist in moving performance factors to criteria more focused on community benefit.
  • Compensation assessments should elaborate on non-qualitative factors, emphasizing the argument that tax-exempt hospitals need to provide more and more community benefit.

Physician Executive-Specific Factors

  • There should be a ceiling or reasonable maximum that the physician can earn.
  • An increasing level of compensation, coupled with decreasing charity care statistics, may trigger scrutiny.
  • Incentive bonuses should include measures such as quality of care and patient satisfaction.
  • Be prepared to show that the arrangement accomplishes a charitable purpose and is not intended to induce referrals or incentivize the “cherry-picking” of patients in an effort to maximize revenues.
  • The arrangement should not be a substitute for a joint venture. JVs need to be structured separately and comply with the separate set of rules and administrative rulings on physician joint ventures with tax-exempt organizations.
  • The compensation should reward physicians for services performed and not activities beyond the physician’s control.

Recruitment Incentives

Categories
Health Law Highlights

Advisory Opinion 23-7 OIG Issues Favorable Opinion Regarding Proposal to Pay Bonuses to Its Employed Physicians Based on Net Profits

From Health Law Diagnosis, by Nathaniel Arden & Michael Lisitano:

  • On October 13, 2023, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) published Advisory Opinion 23-07, in which the OIG issued a favorable opinion regarding a physician group employer’s proposal to pay bonuses to its employed physicians based on net profits derived from certain procedures performed by the physicians at ambulatory surgery centers.
  • Under the proposed arrangement, the Group would pay its physician employees a bonus in addition to the physicians’ base compensation. The bonus would be equal to 30% of the Group’s net profits derived from two ambulatory surgical centers’ facility fee collections attributable to that physician’s procedures.
  • The two ambulatory surgical centers in question would be operated as “divisions” of the Group and not as separate legal entities.
  • The OIG determined that the proposed bonus arrangement is protected by the bona fide employee statutory exception and regulatory safe harbor of the Anti-Kickback Statute and would therefore, not generate prohibited remuneration.
  • The OIG differentiated similar arrangements where the ACS is owned by a separate entity. In those cases, the bona fide employee exception and safe harbor would likely not apply.
  • OIG’s analysis in the Advisory Opinion demonstrates that when properly structured to comply with statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors, certain bonus compensation arrangements of this sort may be permissible.
Categories
Health Law Highlights

UnitedHealth Defends Lucrative Billing Tactic in Appeals Court

From Bloomberg Law, by Jacklyn Wille:

  • “Cross-Plan Offsetting” is the practice by an insurer of clawing back benefits it says were overpaid to a provider under one plan by reducing future payments to the provider under a different plan that it administers.
  • This common insurance billing tactic has invited litigation over its legality and opposition from the Labor Department.
  • In one such case, the Eighth Circuit is being asked to decide whether Smith and Ghanim, who are covered by health plans funded by their employers and administered by United, have been harmed in a way that would give them standing to challenge the practice under ERISA.
Categories
Health Law Highlights

Ozempic’s Success Treating Other Ailments Is Bad News for Rivals

From Bloomberg Law, by Madison Muller:

  • Ozempic, and other GLP-1 receptor agonists, are diabetes medications that have become popular for weight loss.
  • Now, there is evidence that they have other more far-reaching benefits too:
    • They may have a protective effect on the heart, liver and kidneys.
    • They may combat substance abuse or even Alzheimer’s disease.
    • Wegovy has been shown to reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes by 20% in overweight people with a history of heart issues.
  • As a result, these medications may disrupt many different industries.
  • For example, when the manufacturer of Ozempic announced on Oct. 10 that its effectiveness in kidney disease was so conclusive that it was stopping a trial early, it sparked a $3.6 billion selloff in shares of dialysis providers Fresenius Medical Care AG and DaVita Inc.
  • These drugs may also disrupt the health insurance market. Even if approved for new uses, these drugs are very expensivThe list price for Ozempic is about $900 a month, and for Wegovy it’s more than $1,000.
Categories
Health Law Highlights

False Claims Act Risks for Cyber Device Manufacturers Arising Under New Requirements Subject to FDA Enforcement Beginning October 1, 2023

From GibsonDunn, by Winston Chan, Jonathan Phillips, Gustav Eyler, John Partridge, Christopher Rosina, Carlo Felizardo, and Nicole Waddick:

  • The FDA approval process for digital health “cyber devices” requires that premarket submissions contain cybersecurity information, including the company’s plans to address cybersecurity vulnerabilities, processes to provide a reasonable assurance that the devices are cybersecure, a software bill of materials, and other information as the Secretary requires.
  • As of October 1, 2023, the FDA expects companies to comply with these new cybersecurity requirements.
  • False statements related to these disclosures could give rise to false statements and subsequent risk based on the “fraud-on-the-FDA” theory of liability.
  • Companies should take significant care in their statements in premarket submissions regarding their cybersecurity practices and procedures.
Categories
Health Law Highlights

Woman’s Death After IV Therapy Leads to License Suspension for Frisco Anesthesiologist

From D Magazine, by Will Maddox:

  • The Texas Medical Board suspended Frisco anesthesiologist Dr. Michael Gallagher after a mother of four died in July at a med spa for which he was the medical director. 
  • She died after receiving an IV treatment administered by the non-licensed owner of the business. 
  • The med spa did not have protocols or policies for the staff’s IV therapy administration. 
  • There was only an unsigned agreement between Gallagher and the med spa. 
  • There were no licensed medical staff or experienced personnel onsite while IV therapy was being administered. 
  • The treatment the patient received before dying included vitamin B complex, vitamin B12, TPN electrolytes, and ascorbic acid. TPN electrolyte solution requires a prescription and is known to cause complications. 
  • IV therapy is a growing market, but complications can be deadly because it is often administered in medical spas with little medical supervision.
Categories
Health Law Highlights

Congress Eyeing Broker Payments Behind Booming Medicare Sales

From Bloomberg Law, by John Tozzi:

  • About 31 million people – more than half of Medicare enrollees – opt to get their coverage through private plans known as Medicare Advantage.
  • Lawmakers are examining the payments made by health insurers to brokers who sell their Medicare plans, concerned that the payments may be steering seniors to some plans over others.
  • Federal rules limit the commissions Medicare plans can pay brokers, but some companies may be skirting these rules by offering extra payments that can sometimes double brokers’ compensation, influencing them to push plans that pay the most.
  • A report from the Senate Finance Committee last year described deceptive marketing tactics, “fraudulent sales practices,” and instances of people being enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans without knowing it.
  • The large, publicly traded online brokers report revenue from both commissions and other sources, such as “volume-based bonuses” for meeting sales targets and “marketing development funds” for certain customers.
Categories
Health Law Highlights

CMS Publishes Updated Data on Stark Law Voluntary Disclosures

From Policy & Medicine, by Thomas Sullivan:

  • 2022 was a stand-out year for Stark Law self-disclosures. It was the highest year in both the number of disclosures settled and the aggregate amount of all settlements for the year.
  • In 2020, a total of 36 settlements were reached, ranging from $33 to $952,300, for a total of $4,344,966.
  • In 2021, a total of 27 settlements were reached, ranging from $631 to $1,110,148, totaling $1,988,451.
  • In 2022, a total of 104 settlements were reached, ranging from $299 to $1,171,174, for a total of $9,287,866.