A prior S2KM blog post ("MSAs and Liability Cases") highlighted a challenging settlement planning priority: although no statutory or regulatory authority requires Medicare set-aside arrangements (MSAs) in third party liability settlements, confusion continues as to whether and when MSAs are necessary and/or appropriate for such cases.
In that earlier post, S2KM summarized recent recommendations for MSAs in liability cases issued by the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA) and the American Bar Association (ABA) respectively for special need attorneys (case specific) and the United States Congress (legislative).
A new article written by Peter Wayne offers advice to plaintiff attorneys about Medicare compliance in liability cases in the context of this statutory and regulatory uncertainty. Titled "Medicare Update: Information to Help with the Darkness of Medicare Compliance", Wayne's article was recently published in both the 2011 Winter Edition of the Arkansas Trial Lawyers Association's Docket and the NAELA Special Needs Law Section's Spring Newsletter.
While advising plaintiff attorneys, Wayne is sympathetic for defendants and liability insurers whom he characterizes as "hyper sensitive" to Medicare issues for two primary reasons:
- Dissemination of bad Medicare advice by attorneys, consultants and product providers who are positioned to benefit financially from uncertainty; and
- Continued extension by CMS of its enforcement deadline for liability claim reporting under the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 (MMSEA) now re-scheduled to begin the first quarter of 2012.
Wayne's article explains and differentiates current Medicare liability case compliance requirements for:
- "Conditional payments" (amounts paid by Medicare for injury related medical care between the time of injury and settlement) where several parties, including plaintiffs and defendants, run the risk of liability for failing to properly protect Medicare’s interest; and
- "Future interests" (using, for example, an MSA) where the plaintiff and plaintiff’s attorney are responsible, but not the defendant or its insurer.
Conditional Payments - Summary of Wayne's advice for plaintiff attorneys:
- Notify the Medicare Coordinator of Benefits Contractor (“COBC”) of the cause of action.
- Then COBC will assign the case to the Medicare Secondary Payer Recovery Contractor (“MSPRC”).
- Provide the required information along with a signed retainer agreement or proof of representation form.
- Then MSPRC will send the attorney a conditional payment summary within 60-90 days.
- Medicare will send a final demand once the MSPRC is notified of the final settlement and provided with the final settlement detail.
- Pay the final Medicare demand within 60 days of receipt in order to avoid incurring interest and penalties.
Wayne's article also highlights H.R. 4796, the Medicare Secondary Payer Enhancement Act, which proposes these improvements for conditional payments:
- Three year statute of limitations for Medicare to recover their conditional payments;
- Primary payer right of appeal;
- Eliminating the use of private information for MMSEA compliance;
- $5000 minimum threshold for all Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) claims;
- Changing the MMSEA penalty provision from mandatory to discretionary;
- Simplifying the conditional payment process.
Future Interests - Summary of Wayne's advice for plaintiff attorneys:
- Unlike conditional payments, the obligation to satisfy Medicare’s future interests is solely the responsibility of the plaintiff and plaintiff’s attorney.
- CMS has not offered any definitive statements about whether MSAs are needed to account for future medical expenses in liability settlements.
- In workers compensation settlements, MSAs are simply CMS’ preferred methodology for protecting Medicare’s future interest and are not required by law.
- Section 111 of the MMSEA addresses reporting requirements and does not address or require MSAs.
- Circumstances where a plaintiff attorney should consider establishing an MSA or obtaining an objective third party opinion for a liability settlement:
- If the liability settlement will create a permanent shift of the burden for paying for the Medicare beneficiary’s future injury‐related medical expenses from the liability insurance policy or plan to Medicare; and
- The liability settlement provides a definitive allocation of settlement money to the plaintiff’s future injury‐related medical care.
For additional information about Medicare and structured settlements, see Section 15.03 of "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments".
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.