Corporate Transparency Act: Key Considerations for Virtual Care Providers

As of January 1, 2024, the US Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) requires corporations, limited liability companies, limited partnerships and other similar entities to disclose beneficial ownership information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a bureau within the US Department of the Treasury. Although the US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama declared the CTA unconstitutional in March 2024, the decision in the underlying case is limited to the plaintiff. Therefore, all other entities – including virtual care providers – are still required to comply with the CTA.

Following are key considerations for virtual care providers utilizing friendly PC structures.

  1. Are professional entities (i.e., PCs, PLLCs, PAs) subject to CTA reporting requirements? Yes. The CTA includes certain exemptions, but these are unlikely to apply to a professional entity formed to provide virtual care services.
  2. To whom do CTA reporting requirements apply? The reporting obligation is on the reporting company (i.e., the entity formed by a filing in a US state) – not on the beneficial owners or the person or entity assisting with the formation of the reporting company (i.e., the company applicant, defined as the individual who directly files the document that forms the reporting company and the individual who is primarily responsible for directing or controlling such filing if more than one individual is involved in the filing, with no more than two company applicants). However, individuals and entities other than the reporting company can be held liable for willful violations of the CTA (e.g., an individual who willfully fails to report complete beneficial ownership information or an individual who files – or causes the filer to file – false information with FinCEN).
  3. What reporting is required? The reporting company must visit FinCEN’s Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) website to complete and file a beneficial ownership information report (BOIR). Reporting companies formed before January 1, 2024, have until January 1, 2025, to file a BOIR; those formed during 2024 must file a BOIR within 90 calendar days of the effective date of formation; and those formed on or after January 1, 2025, will have 30 calendar days to file a BOIR.
  4. Who are beneficial owners? Are friendly physician owners beneficial owners? Reporting companies must identify each of their beneficial owners, defined as any individual who, directly or indirectly, exercises substantial control over the reporting company or who owns or controls at least 25% of the ownership interests in a reporting company. Individuals with substantial control include senior officers (e.g., president, chief executive officer, chief operating officer, chief financial officer and general counsel), as well as anyone who can make important decisions on behalf of the reporting company, including the power to appoint and remove senior officers or a majority of the board of directors (or similar governing body). Accordingly, friendly physician owners are likely to be beneficial owners.
  5. What information must be reported in a BOIR? Reporting companies must provide the following information:



How to Prepare for New State Health Privacy Laws

New state privacy laws regulating health data impose significant obligations and heightened risks. In addition to existing laws in California, Colorado and other states, Washington State’s My Health My Data Act and Nevada’s Consumer Health Data Privacy Law take effect in March 2024 and will require new or updated privacy notices, enhanced consent and many other compliance steps. Increasing regulator scrutiny of these issues and a new private cause of action in Washington make these laws top compliance priorities.

These laws impact entities ranging from healthcare providers and plans handling non-HIPAA health information online to pharmaceutical, fitness, wellness, identity verification and consumer goods companies. Join our health information privacy lawyers Elliot Golding and Sam Siegfried on March 12 to understand how these laws apply to your company and what you need to do now to prepare.

Discussion topics include:

  • The scope, applicability and requirements under state privacy laws related to health data
  • A deep dive into complex issues arising under these laws, such as the use of cookies and online tracking technologies
  • Benchmarking and practical recommendations for complying with these new requirements and building a harmonized compliance program

RESERVE YOUR SPOT

 




Trending in Telehealth: February 27 – March 4, 2024

Trending in Telehealth highlights state legislative and regulatory developments that impact the healthcare providers, telehealth and digital health companies, pharmacists and technology companies that deliver and facilitate the delivery of virtual care.

Trending in the past week:

  • Interstate compacts
  • Expanding telehealth
  • Regulation of teledentistry

A CLOSER LOOK

Legislation & Rulemaking Activity in Proposal Phase:

Highlights:

  • In Arizona, HB 2446 passed the first chamber. If enacted, the bill would establish licensing requirements for dietician nutritionists and nutritionists, which would allow for the delivery of dietetic and nutrition services via telehealth.
  • In Florida, HB 849 passed both chambers. If enacted, the bill would establish requirements for the delivery of veterinary telehealth services by Florida-licensed veterinarians.
  • In Florida, HB 855 passed both chambers. If enacted, the bill would, among other changes, require dental practice to designate a dentist of record with the Florida Board of Dentistry. It would also require dentists to perform an in-person examination of a patient or to obtain records of an in-person evaluation before initiating orthodontic treatment. The proposal would also require that dentists placing advertisements of dental services provided through telehealth include a disclaimer recommending an in-person examination for each of the following services: an impression or digital dental scan, denture services, placement of an appliance or other structure, and orthodontic treatment. Under the proposal, failure to comply with the evaluation requirement and failure to provide patients with contact information of each dentist who is providing dental services to a patient would be grounds for discipline.
  • In Georgia, HB 844 passed the first chamber. If enacted, the bill would establish licensing requirements for dietician nutritionists and nutritionists, which would allow for the delivery of dietetic and nutrition services via telehealth.
  • In Georgia, HB 441 passed the first chamber. If enacted, the bill would, among other requirements, require a dentist intending to provide care via teledentristry to notify the Georgia Board of Dentistry and to provide documentation that the dentist had established a referral relationship with a dentist capable of providing in-person dental care at a location within the state meeting certain geographic requirements. A dentist providing teledentistry would be permitted to authorize dental hygienists to perform certain dental hygiene functions, prescribe noncontrolled prescriptions and authorize the performance of digital scans and the transmission of patient records to the dentist. The proposed bill would require dentists to perform an initial in-person examination and an in-person exam at least once every 12 months to provide teledentistry services to a patient, except for patients seen in certain specified settings. It would also require dentists to obtain written authorization to a patient with information about the treating dentist and dental hygienist and obtain informed consent after providing a written statement advising the patient that teledentistry was not equivalent to an in-person clinical exam and that the dentist would not physically be present. The bill would prohibit an insurer from excluding coverage for a service [...]

    Continue Reading



Trending in Telehealth: February 12 – February 26, 2024

Trending in Telehealth highlights state legislative and regulatory developments that impact the healthcare providers, telehealth and digital health companies, pharmacists and technology companies that deliver and facilitate the delivery of virtual care.

Trending in the past week:

  • Interstate compacts
  • Professional standards

A CLOSER LOOK

Finalized Legislation & Rulemaking

  • South Dakota enacted the Counseling Compact, making it the 33rd state to ratify the compact.
  • South Dakota also adopted HB 1029, which specifies that licensed hearing aid dispensers and audiologists can deliver services via telehealth provided they are of the same quality as services delivered face-to-face.
  • In Texas, the Commission of Licensing and Regulation adopted rules that reorganize and revise telehealth standards for behavioral analysts. The changes include better aligning the telehealth practice standards with those for other professions regulated by the Department of Licensing and Regulation. Similarly, the Commission of Licensing and Regulation adopted a rule addressing supervision for behavioral analysts, which includes provisions addressing supervision via telehealth.

Legislation & Rulemaking Activity in Proposal Phase

Highlights:

  • In Arizona, SB 1036 passed the first chamber. If enacted, the bill would enact the Social Work Licensure Compact.
  • In Florida, SB 7016 passed both chambers. If enacted, the bill would enter Florida into the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact.
  • In Louisiana, the Behavior Analyst Board proposed rules governing behavioral analyst practice, including establishing telehealth practice standards.
  • In Oklahoma, the Board of Examiners in Optometry proposed rule 505:10-5-19 that would address telemedicine practice by optometrists and, among other things, prohibit an optometrist from prescribing contact lenses or spectacles via a telemedicine encounter. The rule would also establish requirements for informed consent and practice requirements associated with a telemedicine visit.
  • In Tennessee, SB 2134 and HB 2405 each passed one chamber. If enacted, the bills would enact the Social Work Licensure Compact.
  • In Utah, SB 24 passed both chambers. If enacted, the bill would require Medicaid reimbursement for telepsychiatric consultations between a physician assistant and a psychiatrist. The law currently requires reimbursement only for telepsychiatric consultations between a physician and a psychiatrist.
  • In Virginia, HB 326 passed the first chamber. If enacted, the bill would enter Virginia into the Counseling Compact.
  • In West Virginia, HB 4110 passed the first chamber. If enacted, the bill would authorize the state’s Board of Licensed Dietitians to promulgate a legislative rule relating to telehealth practice, requirements and definitions.
  • In Wisconsin, SB 158 passed both chambers and awaits the governor’s signature. If enacted, the bill would enact the Social Work Licensure Compact.

Why it matters:

  • States continue to increase activity surrounding licensure compacts for a variety of health professionals. These state efforts ease the burdens of the licensing process and demonstrate a desire to facilitate multijurisdictional practice without giving up [...]

    Continue Reading



Trending in Telehealth: February 5 – 12, 2024

Trending in Telehealth highlights state legislative and regulatory developments that impact the healthcare providers, telehealth and digital health companies, pharmacists and technology companies that deliver and facilitate the delivery of virtual care.

Trending in the past week:

  • Interstate compacts
  • Facilitation of connectivity and data exchange
  • Professional standards

A CLOSER LOOK

Finalized Legislation & Rulemaking

  • South Dakota enacted the Social Work Licensure Compact, becoming the second state to enact the compact. Missouri enacted the compact in July 2023. The compact will become active once enacted by seven states. According to the National Center for Interstate Compacts, 24 other states have introduced the compact.

Legislation & Rulemaking Activity in Proposal Phase

Highlights:

  • In Idaho, HB 393 passed the first chamber. If enacted, it would enter Idaho into the Counseling Compact.
  • In Indiana, SB 132 passed the first chamber. Currently, Indiana law provides that an out-of-state provider licensed in Indiana may not provide telehealth services in Indiana until the provider and their employer/contractor have filed a certification with the Indiana Professional Licensing Agency that the provider and employer/contractor agree to be subject to Indiana jurisdiction and Indiana substantive and procedural laws. If enacted, the bill would remove the requirement to file the certification, though providers would still be subject to Indiana jurisdiction and Indiana substantive and procedural laws, and the provision of health services (rather than the filing of the certification) would constitute a voluntary waiver of other jurisdictional rights.
  • In West Virginia, HB 5310 passed the first chamber. If enacted, the bill would enact the Remote Patient Outcome Improvement Act to authorize insurers and providers to partner with internet service providers to facilitate the transmission and analysis of vital signs and medical device data.
  • In Wisconsin, the Marriage and Family Therapy, Professional Counseling and Social Worker Examining Board proposed a rule that would update telehealth practice standards by defining telehealth, creating of a new subsection that establishes standards of telehealth practice, amending the definitions of “face-to-face” and “supervision” to include telehealth practice, and amending of unprofessional conduct provisions to incorporate telehealth practice.

Why it matters:

  • States continue to increase activity surrounding licensure compacts for a variety of health professionals. These state efforts ease the burdens of the licensing process and demonstrate a desire to facilitate multijurisdictional practice without giving up authority over professional licensure.
  • Measures emphasizing connectivity and infrastructure complement the increasing availability of reimbursement for remote monitoring and other virtual care modalities. States propose measures such as West Virginia’s Remote Patient Outcome Improvement Act with the expectation that they will help reduce costs of avoidable emergency room and other medical visits when paired with remote monitoring programs.
  • States continue to amend and clarify professional practice standards for telehealth. With the increase in the delivery of care through virtual modalities, professional boards are adopting standards governing telehealth practice across multiple health professions and revising [...]

    Continue Reading



STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

2021 Chambers USA top ranked firm
LEgal 500 EMEA top tier firm 2021
U.S. News Law Firm of the Year 2022 Health Care Law