OIG approves tiered rebate programme based on combination of purchases
The Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the Department of Health and Human Services released a new advisory opinion on 1 July (OIG Advisory Op. 13-07) approving a proposed arrangement by a manufacturer to establish a tiered rebate programme for its customers. Even though the proposed arrangement would aggregate the volume of purchases for products that may not be reimbursable under the same methodology, the OIG found that the arrangement was properly structured to fit in the discount safe harbour of the Anti-Kickback Statute. The advisory opinion contains some important clues as to the OIG’s current attitude towards the reach of the discount safe harbour as applied to bundled sales of different kinds of products and other aggregated purchases that the OIG clarifies do not constitute bundled sales. The advisory opinion seems to conclude that irrespective of the type of buyer, rebates on aggregate volume purchases may be offered on products that would be treated as operating (as opposed to capital) costs, but does not provide any guidance on whether capital equipment can be included among the products for purposes of the rebate.
The requestor of the advisory opinion was a manufacturer of products used to treat ophthalmologic disorders including pharmaceuticals, surgical equipment, vision aids and related products. Under the proposed arrangement, the requestor would establish a tiered rebate programme where the requestor would aggregate customers’ purchases of surgical supplies and devices – whether or not reimbursable by federal healthcare programmes (FHCPs) – to determine the percentage of the customers’ rebate. The manufacturer would notify its customers of the rebate and their reporting obligations in three stages: 1) in the contracts between the parties; 2) in the invoice; and 3) in an end-of-year report that would include a summary of all qualifying purchases, an explanation of the rebate tier the customer reached and a calculation of the total rebate to which the customer is entitled…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Hogan Lovells briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Hogan Lovells
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Hogan Lovells
The decision of the US Court of Appeals has raised questions about how issuers should present their disclosures on conflict minerals under Exchange Act Rule 13p-1 and Form SD.
An interesting judgment was delivered by the Honourable J Majiki on 19 November 2013 in the Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth.
Analysis from The Lawyer
As international firms question their future in these small, closely linked markets, local lawyers too are eyeing the business environment with caution
Beyond the headline infrastructure projects, UK construction work is still recovering from the clobbering it took during the slump