CVS Caremark sued for pharmacy fee collection.
An Iowa Pharmacy Takes on CVS Caremark for Violating Antitrust Regulations
An Iowa pharmacy has filed a lawsuit against CVS Caremark, accusing the healthcare giant of unlawfully collecting fees from pharmacies filling Medicare prescriptions. The lawsuit, filed by Osterhaus Pharmacy, alleges that CVS Caremark, a subsidiary of CVS Health Corporation, has violated antitrust regulations. The pharmacy claims that CVS Caremark offers Pharmacy Benefits Manager (PBM) services to Medicare Part D beneficiaries, but has been delaying adjustments without a legitimate reason, resulting in fees that violate federal antitrust laws and state contract statutes.
Medicare Part D provides outpatient drug coverage to beneficiaries and is administered through private health plans called Part D sponsors. These sponsors contract with the federal government and are run by big health insurance firms that hire PBMs to negotiate drug pricing with manufacturers and determine reimbursement amounts for pharmacies.
Related Stories
-
ea_src=author_manual&ea_med=related_stories“>How to Prepare for Switching to Medicare
9/2/2023
-
Here Are the First 10 Medicare Drugs the Federal Government Is Now Targeting
8/29/2023
When a Medicare Part D beneficiary visits a pharmacy for drugs, the pharmacy fills the prescriptions and receives reimbursements later on. PBMs act as intermediaries between Part D sponsors, pharmacies, and drug manufacturers. However, the lawsuit claims that CVS Caremark’s performance criteria metrics for pharmacies are nonsensical and applied in bad faith.
Independent pharmacies are allegedly forced to sign one-sided contracts with CVS Caremark to stay in its network, placing them at a competitive disadvantage. Opting out of the network would severely limit a pharmacy’s access to patients, leaving them with no practical choice but to participate.
The lawsuit states that PBMs control every aspect of the pharmaceutical filling and dispensing industry, and CVS Caremark, like other PBMs, abuses its control. CVS Caremark denies the allegations and vows to vigorously defend itself.
The Arbitration Issue
The lawsuit also raises concerns about CVS Caremark’s use of forced arbitration clauses with independent pharmacies. These clauses allegedly shield the company’s unlawful conduct from being challenged. The terms of the clause, including the requirement for pharmacies to place a significant amount of money into escrow, make it difficult for independent pharmacies to initiate arbitration.
The National Community Pharmacists Association (NCAP) supports the lawsuit, stating that PBMs have been unfairly gaming the system for a long time. The lawsuit comes at a time when lawmakers are scrutinizing PBMs due to high drug prices. Congress is considering bills to increase transparency and accountability for PBMs.
What are the potential implications and outcomes of the ongoing lawsuit between Osterhaus Pharmacy and CVS Caremark regarding antitrust violations in the PBM market
St-100-days-of-bidens-policies-6761368?ea_src=author_manual&ea_med=related_stories”>Here Are the First 100 Days of Biden’s Policies
9/2/2023
Tennessee Senate Passes Bill Allowing Broad Health Care Sharing
9/2/2023
According to Osterhaus Pharmacy’s complaint, CVS Caremark has been using its dominance in the PBM market to manipulate reimbursement rates, resulting in inflated fees for pharmacies. The pharmacy alleges that CVS Caremark has been delaying adjustments to reimbursement rates for Medicare Part D prescriptions without justification, causing financial harm to pharmacies in violation of federal antitrust laws.
Antitrust regulations aim to promote fair competition in the marketplace and prevent the abuse of market power by dominant players. By using its market position to manipulate reimbursement rates, CVS Caremark may be undermining fair competition and harming independent pharmacies.
The lawsuit argues that CVS Caremark’s actions violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which prohibits monopolization or attempted monopolization of a market. By manipulating reimbursement rates, CVS Caremark is allegedly attempting to maintain its market dominance and prevent other PBMs from competing on an equal footing.
Osterhaus Pharmacy’s lawsuit seeks damages for the financial harm caused by CVS Caremark’s alleged antitrust violations. The pharmacy also calls for injunctive relief, asking the court to prevent CVS Caremark from engaging in further anticompetitive behavior and to order the company to adjust the reimbursement rates in a timely and fair manner.
The outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications for the PBM industry and independent pharmacies across the country. PBMs play a critical role in negotiating drug prices and determining reimbursement rates, which directly impact the financial viability of pharmacies. If CVS Caremark is found guilty of antitrust violations, it could lead to increased scrutiny of the practices of other PBMs and potential reforms to ensure fair competition in the industry.
In recent years, there have been growing concerns about the market power of PBMs and their impact on independent pharmacies. The dominance of a few major PBMs has raised questions about their ability to negotiate fair drug prices and reimbursement rates, potentially squeezing smaller pharmacies out of the market. The outcome of this lawsuit could play a key role in addressing these concerns and ensuring a level playing field for all pharmacies.
The legal battle between Osterhaus Pharmacy and CVS Caremark will likely be closely watched by industry stakeholders and policymakers. Depending on the outcome, it could spur further regulatory action or legislative reforms to address the alleged abuses in the PBM market and protect the interests of independent pharmacies.
As the case unfolds, it will be crucial to monitor the arguments and evidence presented by both parties. The allegations made by Osterhaus Pharmacy highlight the need to enforce antitrust regulations to prevent abuse of market power and protect fair competition. The scrutiny of CVS Caremark’s actions in this lawsuit may lead to important developments in the regulation of the PBM industry, ultimately benefiting pharmacies and Medicare Part D beneficiaries.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...