Stark law backdating contracts
Although the concept of a "financial relationship" may seem simple, Stark defines the term broadly and includes both ownership and investment interests and compensation arrangements between physicians (and their immediate families) and entities.Violation of the Stark Law can incur significant civil liability under both the False Claims Act, civil monetary penalties, and exclusion from all federal healthcare programs.The facts are a bit complicated, involving circumstances surrounding the failure of a bank and transactions in the bank’s loans preceding the failure as well as transactions of the FDIC as the bank’s receiver.
This is especially true in the context of a complex deal that includes multiple documents and when the retroactive date is several months in the past. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania issued an opinion clarifying that the Stark law still requires executed written agreements to meet safe harbor requirements.Additionally, Stark prohibits entities like hospitals from submitting claims for payment to Medicare or Medicaid for items or services that result from the prohibited referrals. The Stark Law exists for the purpose of prohibiting a physician (or an immediate family member of said physician) from making referrals for "designated health services" to an entity with which the referring physician (or immediate family member) has a financial relationship unless the parties comply with one of the exceptions set forth in the federal regulations. Applying the materiality standard from to the "writing requirement" utilized throughout various exceptions to the Stark Law, the District Court found that this requirement, and the signature requirement specifically, represents a material component of the Stark Law for purposes of establishing liability under the federal False Claims Act (FCA).