Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Part II of the No Surprises Act

Client Alert
October 12, 2021

Overview

The Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) published Part II of the No Surprises Act on September 30, 2021, which will take effect on January 1, 2022. The new guidance, in large part, focuses on the independent dispute resolution process that was briefly mentioned in Part I of the Act. In addition, there is now guidance on good faith estimate requirements, the patient-provider dispute resolution processes, and added external review provisions.[1]

Federal Independent Dispute Resolution

The federal independent dispute resolution process is limited to the services under Part I of the Act for which balance billing is prohibited.

The purpose of the dispute resolution process is for out-of-network providers and facilities to determine the out-of-network rate after a conclusion is not made after a 30-day “open negotiation.” This open negotiation period must be initiated first, and only when it fails can the federal independent dispute resolution process then begin, by first being initiated by either party. The required administrative fee for 2022 is $50 per party.

Both parties then must decide on a “certified independent dispute resolution entity,” which must then certify it has no conflicts of interest with either party. If one of these steps cannot be met, the Department of Health and Human Services will select an entity for the parties. The entity must choose between one of the parties’ offers for an out-of-network amount, which will be binding. The losing party will then be liable for the entity’s fee.

Good Faith Estimates

Good faith estimates must be given to uninsured patients for expected charges, including if the services can be provided by other providers or facilities. HHS uses the example of surgery, and states that the good faith estimate would include the cost of the surgery itself, as well as anesthesia, labs, tests, etc. However, it will not include services that would be scheduled separately even though they may be related, such as a physical therapy or a pre-surgery appointment.

Patient-Provider Dispute Resolution

In addition to the federal independent dispute resolution process, a patient-provider resolution has been added in order to resolve instances where a patient received a good faith estimate and then is billed “substantially in excess,” which has been defined as $400 or more. Essentially, this type of dispute resolution requires the patient to have: (1) received a good faith estimate; (2) the patient initiated the process within 120 days of receiving the bill; and (3) the bill the patient received was $400 or more than the good faith estimate. The fee for this process will be $25, to keep the process accessible to consumers.

External Review

Building on an already established rule – in the case of adverse benefit determinations, the scope of external reviews will also apply to determinations involving compliance with the new surprise billing and cost-sharing provisions under the No Surprises Act. Additionally, otherwise-grandfathered plans will also be subject to these provisions.  

Conclusion

Part II of the No Surprises Act introduced a lot of information for providers and facilities to unpack! If you have any additional questions about a specific topic, or Part II of the Act in general, reach out to Healthcare and Hospital Law Member Amanda Waesch by phone at (330) 253-9185 or by email at alwaesch@bmdllc.com. Additionally, the interim final rule can be found here. Click here for information on Part 1 of the Act, Notice Requirements.

[1] Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Requirements Related to Surprise Billing; Part II Interim Final Rule with Comment Period, (Sep. 30, 2021) https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/requirements-related-surprise-billing-part-ii-interim-final-rule-comment-period.

Healthcare LawAmanda L. Waesch
Client Alert

Corporate Transparency Act Effective Again

February 20, 2025The federal judiciary has issued multiple rulings on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), which took effect on January 1, 2024. Previously, enforcement was halted nationwide due to litigation in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury. However, on February 18th, the court lifted the stay, reinstating the CTA’s reporting requirements. Non-exempt entities now have until March 21, 2025, to comply. Businesses should act promptly to avoid civil penalties of $591 per day and potential criminal liability.Client Alert

Status Update: Physician Noncompete Agreements in Ohio

February 11, 2025Noncompete agreements remain enforceable in Ohio if they meet specific legal requirements. While the AMA and FTC have challenged these restrictions, courts continue to uphold reasonable noncompete provisions for physicians. Recent cases, like MetroHealth System v. Khandelwal, highlight how courts may modify overly restrictive agreements to balance employer interests with patient care. With ongoing legal challenges to the FTC’s proposed ban, Ohio physicians should consult a healthcare attorney before signing or challenging a noncompete agreement.Client Alert

Immigration Orders and Their Economic Impact on Small Business: Insights from Attorney and Former Immigration Judge Rob Ratliff

January 30, 2025President Trump's recent executive orders, targeting immigration policies, could significantly impact small businesses in Ohio, particularly those owned by undocumented immigrants. With stricter visa vetting, halted refugee admissions, and potential deportations, these businesses face uncertainty, workforce disruption, and closures. Ohio's immigrant-owned businesses, especially in food services and transportation, contribute billions to the state economy, and any disruption could result in economic ripple effects.Client Alert

Corporate Transparency Act Ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court

January 24, 2025The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), lifting an injunction previously imposed by the Fifth Circuit. However, a separate nationwide injunction remains in effect, meaning businesses are still not required to comply with the CTA’s reporting requirements. FinCEN continues to accept voluntary reporting while enforcement remains paused.Client Alert

Lead Paint Contamination and Resources for Ohio Landlords

January 20, 2025Children are exposed to lead-based paint, which was used in most homes until it was banned in the US in 1978 and “can severely damage the brain and central nervous system causing coma, convulsions and even death.” Property owners and landlords should educate themselves on regulations and resources to mitigate their own liability.
Older posts
Newer posts