Health Plan Compliance

Subscribe to Health Plan Compliance

Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a Texas federal district court order revoking the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the drug mifepristone, which is used as part of a two-drug regimen to induce abortion.  The Fifth Circuit vacated the district…

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit approved the parties’ stipulated agreement to stay enforcement of the district court decision in Braidwood Management Inc. v. Becerra until the appeal is resolved (with a limited exception for the named plaintiffs).  As readers will recall from our prior blog, in Braidwood, a district court had enjoined enforcement of the preventive services mandate for “A” or “B” items and services recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (“USPSTF”) on or after March 23, 2010.  If the district court decision stands, non-grandfathered health plans would not have to cover those particular preventive services without cost-sharing.

On Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an administrative stay of enforcement of the district court decision in Braidwood Management Inc. v. Becerra.  Readers of our earlier blog (found here) will remember that in Braidwood, the district court enjoined enforcement of the preventive services mandate for “A” or “B” items and services recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (“USPSTF”) on or after March 23, 2010.  If the district court decision stands, this means that non-grandfathered plans would not have to cover these services without cost-sharing.  However, as a result of the Fifth Circuit stay issued on May 15, non-grandfathered health plans will continue to be subject to the mandate for these services for the time being.  All other preventive care requirements for health plans remain in place.

“Didn’t we just do this?” might be the first question asked by many health plan sponsors and administrators when gearing up to complete 2022 prescription drug reporting by June 1, 2023.  The answer to that question is both “yes” and “no.”  Yes, because group health plans were required to complete prescription drug reporting for the 2020 and 2021 reference years by January 31, 2023. No, because the agencies released revised instructions for reporting 2022 year data—meaning the reporting exercise for 2022 may be a little different than the last go-around.

The Departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health and Human Services (the “Departments”) recently released guidance for group health plans on required preventive services coverage.  The guidance was issued in response to a federal district court decision in a case called Braidwood Management, Inc. v. Becerra that enjoined enforcement of the preventive services mandate for items and services with an “A” or “B” rating from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (“USPSTF”) on or after March 23, 2010. The Departments issued this guidance to clarify the current scope of the preventive services mandate in light of the court’s decision.

Last Friday, the United States Supreme Court stayed a federal district court order that suspended  the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the drug mifepristone, which is used as part of a two-drug regimen to induce abortion.  This decision means that mifepristone will remain available subject to current FDA dispensation guidelines while the appeal of the district court’s decision proceeds through the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (and potentially the Supreme Court).  Although the Supreme Court’s decision returns mifepristone access to the status quo for the time being, it creates a number of questions for employers and other benefit plan sponsors with respect to abortion coverage in group health plans, which we discuss below.

On February 23, 2023, the Departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health and Human Services (the “Departments”) issued new guidance (in the form of FAQs) implementing the No Surprises Act’s prohibition on “gag clauses” in agreements between health plans and service providers.  While the attestation requirement has been effective since December 27, 2020, the Departments had…

On the heels of several recent court decisions concerning gender-affirming care, a federal district court in Washington concluded that the denial of benefits for gender-affirming care by a third-party administrator (“TPA”) administering a self-insured plan violated Section 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”).  By way of background, Section 1557 sets…

On December 15, 2022, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) published final regulations that make permanent certain relief and changes relating to the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) reporting requirements. Specifically, the final regulations (1) include an automatic 30-day extension for providing Forms 1095-B and 1095-C to covered individuals and employees, which would otherwise be due on…