42 C.F.R. § 405.371

Suspension, offset, and recoupment of Medicare payments to providers and suppliers of services

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General rules—Medicare payments to providers and suppliers, as authorized under this subchapter (excluding payments to beneficiaries), may be one of the following:

(1) Suspended, in whole or in part, by CMS or a Medicare contractor if CMS or the Medicare contractor possesses reliable information that an overpayment exists or that the payments to be made may not be correct, although additional information may be needed for a determination.

(2) In cases of suspected fraud, suspended, in whole or in part, by CMS or a Medicare contractor if CMS or the Medicare contractor has consulted with the OIG, and, as appropriate, the Department of Justice, and determined that a credible allegation of fraud exists against a provider or supplier, unless there is good cause not to suspend payments.

(3) Offset or recouped, in whole or in part, by a Medicare contractor if the Medicare contractor or CMS has determined that the provider or supplier to whom payments are to be made has been overpaid.

(4) Suspended, in whole or in part, by CMS or a Medicare contractor if the provider or supplier has been subject to a Medicaid payment suspension under § 455.23(a)(1) of this chapter.

(b) Good cause exceptions applicable to payment suspensions. (1) CMS may find that good cause exists not to suspend payments or not to continue to suspend payments to an individual or entity against which there are credible allegations of fraud if—

(i) OIG or other law enforcement agency has specifically requested that a payment suspension not be imposed because such a payment suspension may compromise or jeopardize an investigation;

(ii) It is determined that beneficiary access to items or services would be so jeopardized by a payment suspension in whole or part as to cause a danger to life or health;

(iii) It is determined that other available remedies implemented by CMS or a Medicare contractor more effectively or quickly protect Medicare funds than would implementing a payment suspension; or

(iv) CMS determines that a payment suspension or a continuation of a payment suspension is not in the best interests of the Medicare program.

(2) Every 180 days after the initiation of a suspension of payments based on credible allegations of fraud, CMS will—

(i) Evaluate whether there is good cause to not continue such suspension under this section; and

(ii) Request a certification from the OIG or other law enforcement agency that the matter continues to be under investigation warranting continuation of the suspension.

(3) Good cause not to continue to suspend payments to an individual or entity against which there are credible allegations of fraud must be deemed to exist if a payment suspension has been in effect for 18 months and there has not been a resolution of the investigation, except CMS may extend a payment suspension beyond that point if—

(i) The case has been referred to, and is being considered by, the OIG for administrative action (for example, civil money penalties); or such administrative action is pending or

(ii) The Department of Justice submits a written request to CMS that the suspension of payments be continued based on the ongoing investigation and anticipated filing of criminal or civil action or both or based on a pending criminal or civil action or both. At a minimum, the request must include the following:

(A) Identification of the entity under suspension.

(B) The amount of time needed for continued suspension in order to conclude the criminal or civil proceeding or both.

(C) A statement of why or how criminal or civil action or both may be affected if the requested extension is not granted.

(c) Steps necessary for suspension of payment, offset, and recoupment. (1) Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, CMS or the Medicare contractor suspends payments only after it has complied with the procedural requirements set forth at § 405.372.

(2) The Medicare contractor offsets or recoups payments only after it has complied with the procedural requirements set forth at § 405.373.

(d) Suspension of payment in the case of unfiled cost reports. (1) If a provider has failed to timely file an acceptable cost report, payment to the provider is immediately suspended in whole or in part until a cost report is filed and determined by the Medicare contractor to be acceptable.

(2) In the case of an unfiled cost report, the provisions of § 405.372 do not apply. (See § 405.372(a)(2) concerning failure to furnish other information.)

(e) Suspension of payment in the case of unfiled hospice cap determination reports. (1) If a provider has failed to timely file an acceptable hospice cap determination report, payment to the provider is immediately suspended in whole or in part until a cap determination report is filed and determined by the Medicare contractor to be acceptable.

(2) In the case of an unfiled hospice cap determination report, the provisions of § 405.372 do not apply. (See § 405.372(a)(2) concerning failure to furnish other information.)

[76 FR 5961, Feb. 2, 2011, as amended at 79 FR 50509, Aug. 22, 2014; 84 FR 47852, Sept. 10, 2019] i
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 89 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Nichole Medical Equipment & Supply, Inc. v. Tricenturion, Inc.
Nichole Medical Equipment & Supply, Inc. v. Tricenturion, Inc. (2012) ca3 · cites it 4× “” 4 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (a)(1) (emphasis added).”
Neurological Associates-H. Hooshmand, M.D., P.A. v. Bowen (1987) flsd · cites it 13× “42 C.F.R. Section 405.371(a) gives the provider such rights as prior notice and opportunity for hearing in the event that payments are temporarily suspended.”
Kailash C. Pani, M.D., and Kailash C. Pani, M.D., P.C. v. Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield (1998) ca2 · cites it 2× “§§ 1395h, 1395u; 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (b) (authorizing carriers to suspend payments under circumstances involving fraud or willful misrepresentation); 42 C.”
United States Ex Rel. Absher v. Momence Meadows Nursing Center, Inc. (2014) ca7 · cites it 2× “42 C.F.R. § 405.371 . To ensure that Mo-mence was providing adequate care, the facility was subject to inspection (“surveys”) by government regulators.”
Family Rehab., Inc. v. Azar (2018) ca5 “§ 1395ddd(f)(2) ; 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (a)(3). 2 Third, the provider may request de novo review before an ALJ within the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA), an agency independent of CMS.”
Med-Cert Home Care, LLC v. Azar (2019) txnd · cites it 2× “§ 1395ddd(f)(2) ; 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (a)(3). Third, the provider may request de novo review before an ALJ within the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA), an agency independent of CMS.”
True Health Diagnostics, LLC v. Azar (2019) txed · cites it 7× “" 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (a)(2). "A credible allegation of fraud is an allegation from any source, including but not limited to the following: (1) Fraud hotline complaints[,] (2) Claims data mining[,] (3) Patterns identified through provider audits, civil false claims cases, and…”
United States of America, Cross-Appellee v. John Canova (2005) ca2 “§ 1395gg; 42 C.F.R. §§ 405.371 (a)(2), 405.373; see generally United States v.”
Maxmed Healthcare, Inc. v. Thomas Price (2017) ca5 “§ 1395ddd(f)(3) and 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 require the Secretary “to disclose information about the review and statistical sampling that was followed to calculate an overpayment[.”
Infinity Healthcare Servs., Inc. v. Azar (2018) txsd · cites it 2× “§ 1395ddd(f)(2) ; 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (a)(3). Third, the provider may request de novo review before an ALJ within the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA), an agency independent of CMS.”
Integrated Generics, Inc. v. Bowen (1988) nyed · cites it 4× “42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (a). After notification, the provider is given the opportunity to submit a statement and evidence showing why the suspension should not be put into effect.”
Victoria Druding v. Care Alternatives (2023) ca3 “14 As Care Alternatives forcefully argues, the government has not availed itself of any of its myriad enforcement tools, including its ability to recoup prior payments, 42 C.F.R. § 405.371 (a)(3).15 But whether that inaction is dispositive evidence of 12 However, the United…”
— 42 C.F.R. § 405.371(a) — 1 case
Neurological Associates-H. Hooshmand, M.D., P.A. v. Bowen (1987) flsd “42 C.F.R. Section 405.371(a) gives the provider such rights as prior notice and opportunity for hearing in the event that payments are temporarily suspended.”
— 42 C.F.R. § 405.371(a)(1) — 1 case
— 42 C.F.R. § 405.371(a)(3) — 1 case
Advanced Tissue, LLC (2023) areb
— 42 C.F.R. § 405.371(b) — 3 cases
Neurological Associates-H. Hooshmand, M.D., P.A. v. Bowen (1987) flsd “42 C.F.R. Section 405.371(a) gives the provider such rights as prior notice and opportunity for hearing in the event that payments are temporarily suspended.”
— 42 C.F.R. § 405.371(b)(2)(i) — 1 case
— 42 C.F.R. § 405.371(b)(3) — 1 case
— 42 C.F.R. § 405.371(b)(3)(ii) — 1 case
PainMD, LLC v. Azar (2019) tnmd
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.