Stark Law Changes: Hospitals Need to Revisit Physician Compensation Arrangements

06 September 2022 Health Care Law Today Blog
Author(s): Jana L. Kolarik

Based on recent changes and clarifications made by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in the Federal Physician Self-Referral Law (commonly known as the “Stark Law”), hospitals and health systems need to revisit their physician compensation plans. If the compensation falls under the in-office ancillary services exception, then many of the changes do not affect compliance with the Stark Law, but if the hospital or health system seeks to meet the Stark Law employment exception and/or indirect compensation arrangement exception, the arrangement should be carefully reviewed.

Partner Jana Kolarik and PYA Principal Angie Caldwell, who address the valuation aspects of the analysis, published two articles in Bloomberg Law that discuss the following compliance takeaways in detail:

  • Some physician compensation plans have been set up to trigger review when productivity is above the 75th percentile. In December 2020, CMS made clear that there are no presumptive percentiles that are FMV. Such compensation plans should be fine-tuned to make compensation consistent with the physician’s personal productivity, instead of assuming that anything below the 75th percentile will be deemed fair market value (FMV).

  • Regarding a commercial reasonableness (CR) analysis, ensure the compensation is consistent with the services performed by the individual practitioner. For example, if a physician is compensated based on his/her advanced practice providers’ (APPs’) work relative value units (wRVUs), ensure that such compensation is for services performed by the physician, i.e., supervision. (For this discussion, APPs include nurse practitioners and physician assistants.)

  • Review current arrangements that could fall under the definition of “indirect compensation arrangements,” which was recently revised, because certain compensation arrangements that consider APP wRVUs as physician compensation may have issues meeting CR and FMV tests and the indirect compensation arrangements exception under 42 C.F.R. § 411.357(p).

Jana will be discussing the Stark Law changes, and Angie will be providing related valuation examples during the September 13, 2022 Let’s Talk Compliance webinar entitled Stark Law Changes and Impact on Physician Compensation Part 2. Attendees may ask questions in advance. Please join us on September 13th!

These articles are also referenced in Becker's ASC Review.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services