From our Thought Leaders in Health Law video series: In today's complex and rapidly evolving health care landscape, navigating the path of expanding or selling a business requires a nuanced understanding of the intricate state and federal regulatory frameworks.
With states increasingly imposing legislative oversight to safeguard competition, care access, and quality, it's crucial for health care providers, private equity firms, and management organizations to have a strategic partner adept at handling these challenges.
States are imposing prior approval or prior review legislation to allow for more visibility regarding proposed transactions. Much of the legislation seeks to increase oversight of health care entity relationships with management companies and private equity firms.
What does this mean for you?
New from the Diagnosing Health Care Podcast: The game has changed—are you positioned to adapt? Over the past 12 months, the federal government has been heavily regulating private investment in health care entities.
Simultaneously, multiple states have enacted or introduced new laws restricting or requiring approval of such investments. The question arises: What do you do if you already have investments in these health care entities?
On this episode, Leslie Norwalk, Strategic Counsel at Epstein Becker Green (EBG), joins EBG attorneys Josh Freemire, Tim Murphy, and Ted Kennedy, Jr., to discuss how health care entities, investors, and board members should be responding to an evolving political and regulatory environment that has increased the scrutiny of private investment in health care entities.
Distressed businesses are often compared to melting ice cubes or an aircraft in rapid descent. The goal for a distressed business is to get to a transaction before the ice cube melts or the aircraft and ground meet at an unsurvivable speed. New state laws modeled after the federal Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act now require, or will soon require, parties to provide notice of certain health care transactions to state regulators creating additional hurdles for distressed healthcare businesses.
State governments are increasingly entering the field of health care market oversight and enforcement. In what was once an issue typically left to the federal government, state governments are looking for ways to regulate market activity in the health care industry as a way to stem increases in health care costs. Late May brought yet another example of what the future may offer in this regard.
In this episode of the Diagnosing Health Care Podcast: After nearly two years of combined efforts from the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, the agencies jointly issued much-anticipated merger guidelines identifying the procedures and enforcement practices they will apply for evaluating potential mergers.
What might these changes mean for hospitals, health systems, and other stakeholders in the health care industry?
On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Trish Wagner, John Steren, Jeremy Morris, and Dan Fahey discuss some of the key changes in the finalized antitrust merger guidelines and what these guidelines mean for the agencies' approach to enforcement.
On March 13, 2024, Indiana Governor Eric J. Holcomb signed Senate Enrolled Act No. 9 (“SEA 9”) which will amend the Indiana Code with respect to notice of health care entity mergers and acquisitions.
The measure, effective July 1, 2024, adds a new Chapter 8.5 to the Indiana Code providing in Section 4(a) that “[a]n Indiana health care entity that is involved in a merger or acquisition with another health care entity with total assets, including combined entities and holdings, of at least ten million dollars ($10,000,000) shall, at least ninety (90) days prior to the merger or ...
On February 28, 2024, bipartisan legislation was introduced in the Connecticut General Assembly by the State Senate and House of Representatives that would require the executive director of the Office of Health Strategy to develop a plan concerning private equity firms acquiring or holding an ownership interest in health care facilities in the state.
Raised HB 5319, sponsored by Sen. Jeff Gordon (R) and Sen. Saud Anwar (D), was referred to the state’s Joint Committee on Public Health. A public hearing was held on March 6.
This legislation, and related bills around the country, are ...
On February 22, 2024, legislation was introduced in Minnesota’s House of Representatives that would prohibit private equity companies or real estate investment trusts (REITs) from acquiring or increasing any direct or indirect ownership interest those entities have in a health care provider after August 1, 2024.
H.F. No. 4206, authored by state Rep. Jessica Hanson and referred to the Commerce, Finance, and Policy Committee, would also prohibit private equity or REITs from acquiring or increasing any operational or financial control those entities have over a provider, after ...
As our December 2023 Insight noted, California’s SB 184 (enacted in June 2022) and accompanying regulations contain pre-transaction notice requirements by “specified health care entities” for certain “material change transactions” involving the provision of “health care services” in the state. SB 184, which takes effect on April 1, 2024, also established a state Office of Health Care Accountability.
While many transactions involving health care entities will already face the notice requirements of SB 184, AB 3129, introduced by California Assembly Member ...
Oregon’s Proposed HB 4130, which passed the Oregon House of Representatives on February 22, 2024, was at the desk of the Senate president when the 82nd Legislative Assembly adjourned sine die on March 7, 2024, thereby ending this legislation for this year. HB 4130 would have severely limited non-professional businesses from owning or controlling health-related entities through commonly used management models and, therefore, would greatly reduce physicians from seeking non-professional investors.
For those opposing the measure, the victory may only be temporary. The ...
An increasing number of states are requiring advance notice of health care transactions. These requirements may delay transactions or result in confidential information becoming accessible to the public. Effective August 1, 2023, New York[1] enacted legislation that requires health care entities involved in material transaction(s) to provide written notice to the New York Department of Health at least 30 days prior to the closing of the transaction. In enacting the legislation, New York joined Connecticut[2], Massachusetts[3], Nevada[4], Oregon[5], Rhode Island[6], and ...
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- As the Window for Comments Closes on ONC/ASTP’s HTI-2 Proposed Rule: What’s in HTI-2 and What Does It Mean for You?
- Unpacking Averages: Assessing FDA’s Postmarket Surveillance Under Section 522
- Video: New State Legislation Increases Oversight of Health Care Transactions – Thought Leaders in Health Law
- Video: New HIPAA Final Rule - Key Changes to Reproductive Health Care Privacy – Thought Leaders in Health Law
- Post-AB 3129, California Sponsored MSOs Must Focus on Compliance, Strategic Growth, and Exit Planning