Is Moda Health Violating Antitrust Law?
A Discussion Paper
Several aspects of the Moda Health’s contracting behavior raise reasonable concern about potential violation of antitrust laws. There is reasonable concern that Moda’s lack of transparency, nonsensical incentive calculations, and their refusal to respond to requests for crucial information might constitute Antitrust violations. Their actions restrict competition, create unfair market advantage, and prevent providers from making informed decisions which are procompetitive. Provider groups should seek legal counsel, document their concerns, and consider regulatory and legislative avenues to address the potential violations.
Potential Antitrust Violations in Moda Health’s Contracting Practices
Moda Health's contracting behavior raises significant concerns about potential violations of antitrust laws. Issues such as lack of transparency, nonsensical incentive calculations, and refusal to respond to requests for crucial information might constitute antitrust violations. These actions could restrict competition, create an unfair market advantage, and prevent providers from making informed decisions, which are crucial for fostering a competitive healthcare environment. To address these potential violations, provider groups should seek legal counsel, document their concerns, and consider pursuing regulatory and legislative remedies.
Lack of Transparency
One of the primary issues with Moda Health’s contracting practices is their refusal to provide essential information to support risk-sharing agreements. For instance, they do not disclose the names of other participating provider groups, creating significant information asymmetry. This lack of transparency could lead to market foreclosure if the actions prevent new entrants or smaller provider groups from understanding and managing their risks, effectively excluding them from the market. Such behavior could be viewed as a violation of the Sherman Act, Section 1, which prohibits practices that restrain trade and competition.
Furthermore, Moda Health's lack of transparency gives it an unfair competitive advantage. By withholding information, they can limit providers' ability to negotiate or compete on equal terms, potentially violating the Federal Trade Commission Act’s prohibition of unfair methods of competition. This behavior could also fall under the Clayton Act, Section 3, which addresses practices that may harm competition. The refusal to share information may result in information asymmetry, creating an unfair competitive landscape that potentially violates the Sherman Act and the FTC Act. This lack of transparency could lead to enforcement actions by the FTC or the DOJ to ensure fair competition.
Nonsensical Incentive Calculations
Another issue is the calculation of incentives for measurement and performance, which are perceived as nonsensical and potentially misaligned with the targets between the health plan and providers. Such misalignment may lead to deceptive practices under antitrust laws. If the incentive structures mislead providers about potential earnings or benefits, it could be considered a violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce.
Misaligned incentives can also distort the market, leading to inefficiencies and potentially restricting trade by discouraging provider participation. This could fall under the Sherman Antitrust Act, which addresses practices that restrain trade and competition. The lack of transparency in incentive calculations could mislead providers and distort market operations, leading to legal actions or legislation requiring fair incentive calculations.
Refusal to Share Information for Risk Analysis
Moda Health's refusal to share information necessary for providers to conduct a risk analysis and evaluate the viability of the Value-Based Payment (VBP) contract is another critical concern. This behavior limits providers' ability to make informed decisions, hindering competition by disadvantaging those who cannot properly assess their risks. Such practices may violate the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits contracts, combinations, or conspiracies in restraint of trade or commerce.
If Moda Health holds significant market power, its refusal to share critical information could be viewed as an abuse of market power intended to maintain dominance and control over the market. This could violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which addresses monopolization and attempts to monopolize, and may also be scrutinized under the Federal Trade Commission Act for unfair methods of competition.
Relevant Antitrust Regulations
The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits agreements that unreasonably restrain competition (Section 1) and prohibits monopolization or attempts to monopolize any part of trade or commerce (Section 2). The Federal Trade Commission Act prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices (Section 5).
Potential Violations and Remedies
For restrictive practices, the refusal to share information necessary for risk analysis can be seen as a practice that restrains trade by preventing providers from making informed decisions. This could lead to enforcement actions by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or the Department of Justice (DOJ) to ensure fair competition. If Moda Health's refusal to share information constitutes an abuse of its dominant market position, it could be seen as an attempt to monopolize the market, violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Legal action may be necessary to prevent Moda Health from using its market power to control competition, ensuring all providers have access to necessary information for risk analysis.
Prevention Options
To address these concerns, providers should seek legal counsel with expertise in antitrust issues to evaluate whether Moda Health's actions constitute a violation. If sufficient evidence is found, providers may consider filing a complaint with the FTC or DOJ Antitrust Division to initiate an investigation. It is also important for providers to document all interactions with Moda Health, particularly instances where information was requested and denied, as this documentation can support a potential legal case.
Additionally, collaboration with public employee unions and state health regulators can advocate for greater transparency and fairness in VBP contracts. Providers can work collectively to amplify concerns and push for regulatory intervention. Finally, advocating for legislative change is crucial. Providers can work with legislators to draft and support laws mandating transparency in VBP contracts, especially those funded by taxpayer dollars. Proposed legislation could require Healthplans to disclose necessary information for effective risk-sharing, ensuring a competitive market environment.
Discussion Outline
1. Lack of Transparency
Issue
The health plan’s refusal to provide essential information to support the risk-sharing agreement, including the names of other participating provider groups, creates a significant information asymmetry.
Antitrust Concern
Market Foreclosure:
Issue: The health plan’s refusal to disclose essential information about the risk-sharing agreement and participating provider groups.
Antitrust Concern: Market foreclosure can occur if the Healthplan's actions prevent new entrants or smaller provider groups from understanding and managing their risks, effectively excluding them from the market.
Regulation: This could be seen as a violation of the Sherman Act, Section 1, which prohibits practices that restrain trade and competition.
Unfair Competitive Advantage
Issue: The health plan's lack of transparency provides it with an unfair competitive advantage.
Antitrust Concern: By withholding information, the health plan can limit providers' ability to negotiate or compete on equal terms, potentially violating the Federal Trade Commission Act’s prohibition of unfair methods of competition.
Regulation: This could also fall under the Clayton Act, Section 3, which addresses practices that may harm competition.
Potential Violations and Remedies
Information Asymmetry: The health plan's refusal to share information could be viewed as creating an unfair competitive landscape, potentially violating the Sherman Act and the FTC Act.
Lack of Transparency: This could lead to enforcement actions by the FTC or the DOJ, aimed at ensuring that the health plan provides necessary information to enable fair competition.
Market Foreclosure: By preventing new entrants or smaller provider groups from competing effectively, the health plan's actions could lead to market foreclosure, which is a concern under the Sherman Act.
2. Nonsensical Incentive Calculations
Issue
The calculation of incentives for measurement and performance is perceived as nonsensical, potentially misaligning incentives for targets between the health plan and providers.
Antitrust Concerns
Deceptive Practices:
Antitrust Concern: If the incentive structures are designed in a way that misleads providers about potential earnings or benefits, it could be considered a deceptive practice under antitrust laws.
Regulation: This could be a violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce.
Restriction of Trade:
Antitrust Concern: Misaligned incentives can distort the market, leading to inefficiencies and potentially restricting trade by discouraging provider participation.
Regulation: This could fall under the Sherman Antitrust Act, which addresses practices that restrain trade and competition.
Potential Violations and Remedies
Information Asymmetry:
Antitrust Concern: The Healthplan's refusal to share necessary information can create an unfair competitive landscape.
Regulation: This may violate the Sherman Act and the FTC Act by preventing providers from making informed decisions.
Remedy: Enforcement actions by the FTC or DOJ or legislation to ensure the Healthplan provides necessary information for fair competition.
Lack of Transparency:
Antitrust Concern: Lack of transparency in incentive calculations could mislead providers and distort market operations.
Regulation: The FTC Act's prohibition on deceptive practices and the Sherman Act's concern with trade restraints could be invoked.
Remedy: Legal actions or legislation to require transparent and fair incentive calculations.
Market Foreclosure:
Antitrust Concern: Preventing new entrants or smaller provider groups from competing effectively due to deceptive or misaligned incentives.
Regulation: This could be a violation of the Sherman Act if it restricts competition and leads to market foreclosure.
Remedy: FTC or DOJ interventions or legislation to prevent anticompetitive practices and ensure a competitive market environment.
3. Refusal to Share Information for Risk Analysis
Issue
The health plan’s refusal to share information necessary for providers to conduct a risk analysis and evaluate the viability of the Value-Based Payment (VBP) contract.
Antitrust Concerns
Restrictive Practices:
Concern: This behavior limits the ability of providers to make informed decisions, hindering competition by disadvantaging providers who cannot properly assess their risks.
Regulation: Such practices may violate the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits contracts, combinations, or conspiracies in restraint of trade or commerce.
Abuse of Market Power:
Concern: If the health plan holds significant market power, its refusal to share critical information could be viewed as an abuse of market power intended to maintain dominance and control over the market.
Regulation: This could violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which addresses monopolization and attempts to monopolize. It may also be scrutinized under the Federal Trade Commission Act for unfair methods of competition.
Relevant Antitrust Regulations
Sherman Antitrust Act:
Section 1: Prohibits agreements that unreasonably restrain competition.
Section 2: Prohibits monopolization or attempts to monopolize any part of trade or commerce.
Federal Trade Commission Act:
Section 5: Prohibits unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices.
Potential Violations and Remedies
Restrictive Practices:
Violation: The refusal to share information necessary for risk analysis can be seen as a practice that restrains trade by preventing providers from making informed decisions.
Remedy: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or the Department of Justice (DOJ) could enforce actions to ensure that the health plan provides necessary information to enable fair competition.
Abuse of Market Power:
Violation: If the health plan's refusal to share information constitutes an abuse of its dominant market position, it could be seen as an attempt to monopolize the market, violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
Remedy: Legal action to prevent the health plan from using its market power to control competition, ensuring that all providers have access to necessary information for risk analysis.
Prevention Options
Seek Legal Counsel
Providers should consult with antitrust legal experts to assess the potential for legal action. An experienced attorney can evaluate the specific facts and determine whether a health plan's actions constitute an antitrust violation.
File a Complaint
If there is sufficient evidence of antitrust violation, providers may consider filing a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or the Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division. This can initiate an investigation into a health plan's practices.
Document Concerns
Providers should document all interactions and communications with the Healthplan, particularly instances where information was requested and denied. Detailed records can support a potential legal case.
Collaborate with Unions and Regulators
Engage public employee unions and state health regulators to advocate for greater transparency and fairness in VBP contracts. Collective action can amplify concerns and push for regulatory intervention.
Advocate for Legislative Change
Work with legislators to draft and support laws which mandate transparency of VBP contracts, especially those funded by taxpayer dollars. Proposed legislation could require Healthplans to disclose the information necessary for effective risk-sharing.
DISCLAIMER and PURPOSE: This discussion document is intended for training, education, or research purposes. The information contained herein is based on the data and perspectives available at the time of writing. It is subject to revision as new information and viewpoints emerge.
For more information see: https://www.mentorresearch.org/disclaimer-and-purpose