The Inflation Reduction Act (the “IRA”) requires drug manufacturers to pay rebates to Medicare when the prices of their Part B and Part D prescription drug increase faster than the rate of inflation. We recently discussed the guidance documents issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) detailing the proposed implementation of the Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Inflation Rebate Programs.
Though many recent reforms regarding prescription drug affordability have been focused on manufacturers and health plans, pharmacy benefit managers (“PBMs”) are also the focus of increased attention from federal policymakers and agencies.
Continue Reading PBM Practices Receive Increased Federal Scrutiny
According to the White House, the end of the COVID-19 national emergency and public health emergency (PHE) declarations is now barely two months away, as they are scheduled to end on May 11, 2023. These declarations provided the federal government with flexibility to waive or modify certain regulatory requirements applicable to the healthcare industry. Once the declarations end, so will the vast majority of these flexibilities and waivers. Accordingly, a relatively short and closing window remains for the healthcare industry – including but not limited to health plans, hospitals, home health agencies, clinics, and entities that offer telehealth services – to prepare their operational, administrative, and clinical teams for the reinstatement of previously waived requirements.
On February 9, 2023, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) released two highly-anticipated guidance documents (the “Guidance”) detailing the agency’s proposed implementation of the Medicare Part B (“Part B”) and Medicare Part D (“Part D”) Prescription Drug Inflation Rebate Programs (each, a “Rebate Program” and, collectively, the “Rebate Programs”). The Rebate Programs are administered as part of the prescription drug affordability provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act (the “IRA”), which is aimed at “lower[ing] out-of-pocket drug costs for people with Medicare and improv[ing] the sustainability of the Medicare program for current and future generations.”[1] The IRA represents the most sweeping healthcare legislation passed by Congress since the Affordable Care Act.[2] Please refer to our previous blog post on the IRA.
As we approach the middle of the first quarter of 2023, private equity firms have continued to demonstrate their interest in investing in digital health. This does not come as a surprise, as most startups in the healthcare technology space have been active in developing attractive strategies. These companies strive to improve health outcomes and lower expenses by focusing on specific gaps, issues or illnesses, prioritizing technological innovation, and customizing individualized care plans.
Continue Reading Private Equity and Digital Health in 2023: Policy Updates and Trends to Watch
Just in time for the holidays, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued the Contract Year 2024 Proposed Rule for Medicare Advantage organizations (“MAOs”) and Part D sponsors (the “Proposed Rule”). The Proposed Rule includes changes on an array of topics including: Star Ratings, medication therapy management, marketing and communications, health equity, provider directories, coverage criteria, prior authorization, behavioral health services, identification of overpayments, requirements for valid contract applications, and formulary changes.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) has issued a proposed rule which would amend the existing regulations for reporting and returning identified overpayments (the “Proposed Rule”). Specifically, with respect to the meaning of “identification” of overpayment, CMS proposes to eliminate the “reasonable diligence” (or traditional negligence) standard and replace it with the False Claims Act’s (“FCA’s”) standard of “knowing” and “knowingly” (i.e., reckless disregard or deliberate ignorance of a potential overpayment).
It is widely reported that healthcare is a top antitrust enforcement priority in the U.S. The healthcare industry has undergone a transformation over the over the last twenty years and now comprises 17.7% of the U.S. gross domestic product and over $3.795 trillion of the U.S. government budget. Mega-deals among national payors and household names have grabbed headlines and been targets of enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division (the “DOJ”) and Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) (collectively, “the Agencies”).
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued a proposed rule, “Advancing Interoperability and Improving Prior Authorization Processes” (the “Proposed Rule”), that is intended to improve patient and provider access to health information and streamline processes related to prior authorization for medical items and services. The Proposed Rule would withdraw CMS’s December 18, 2020 Interoperability and Prior Authorization proposed rule, build on the policies finalized in the agency’s May 1, 2020 Interoperability and Patient Access final rule, and incorporate feedback CMS received from commenters on the December 2020 proposed rule.
Continue Reading CMS Includes MAOs in Data Exchange and Prior Authorization Requirements
Pharmaceutical manufacturers are challenging the breadth of the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) in federal court, arguing that the government is harming the very vulnerable patients it aims to serve by prohibiting cost-sharing subsidies for life-saving oncology drugs. In October, we discussed the Office of Inspector General’s (“OIG”) Advisory Opinion No. 22-19 (the “Advisory Opinion”), which declared that a charitable organization funded by manufacturers would violate the AKS if it offered certain cost-sharing subsidies under Medicare Part D (“Part D”), even if the organization was independently run and patients had equal access to discounts for 90% of drugs on the market. On November 9, 2022, the Pharmaceutical Coalition for Patient Access (“PCPA”), presumably the organization behind the Advisory Opinion, filed a lawsuit against OIG, seeking declaratory judgment that its cost-sharing program is legal under the AKS and that the Advisory Opinion violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) and the First Amendment.[1]
Continue Reading Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Ask EDVa to Allow Cost-Sharing Under the AKS
On Monday, we discussed that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) has heightened oversight of Medicare Advantage (“MA”) organizations’ and Part D sponsors’ marketing practices. We also noted that the United States Senate Committee on Finance (the “Committee”) sent letters to 15 state insurance commissioners and state health insurance assistance programs, requesting data and information on MA marketing complaints in August 2022. Yesterday, the Committee, chaired by Ron Wyden, released a report entitled Deceptive Marketing Practices Flourish in Medicare Advantage (“the Report”).