Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS)

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia recently dismissed an appeal by the Pharmaceutical Coalition for Patient Access (“PCPA”) that challenged a negative opinion issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) concerning pharmaceutical manufacturers’ offers of cost-sharing subsidies to Medicare Part D (“Part D”) beneficiaries. The opinion under review was Advisory Opinion No. 22-19,[1] which we previously wrote about[2] and in which the OIG advised that if pharmaceutical manufacturers offered the proposed cost-sharing subsidies to Part D beneficiaries via PCPA, they could be subject to liability under the Federal health care program Anti-Kickback Statute (the “AKS”), even though the proposed subsidies would not violate the Civil Monetary Penalty Law’s Beneficiary Inducement Prohibition (“BIP”).Continue Reading District Court Elucidates the Meaning of “to Induce” Under the Federal Health Care Program Anti-Kickback Statute

Late last week, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) posted Advisory Opinion No. 23-07 affirming the broad protection available for compensation to employed physicians under the bona fide employee exception and safe harbor to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (the “AKS”). The opinion highlights flexibility for healthcare providers seeking to compensate employees in ways that align incentives with their employers, and particularly for physician practices to align employed physicians with use of the practices’ ambulatory surgery center (“ASC”) capabilities.Continue Reading OIG Confirms the Broad Protection of Employee Safe Harbor