Blog

The Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) remains one of the most complex and heavily enforced healthcare laws. As enforcement intensifies, healthcare organizations must move beyond reactive compliance and embed AKS risk management into everyday operations.

Executives, investors, operators, and compliance officers share responsibility for maintaining compliance. By taking proactive, practical steps, stakeholders can protect enterprise value, reduce exposure, and demonstrate to regulators that compliance is a core part of the business model—not an afterthought.

Every healthcare organization has unique risk points based on its structure, service lines, and financial relationships. A strong compliance

The Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) is broad enough to capture almost any financial arrangement in healthcare. While safe harbors protect certain transactions, other business models routinely attract regulatory scrutiny. These high-risk arrangements share a common theme - they create financial incentives that can influence referrals, physician decision-making, or utilization of federally reimbursed services.

Executives, investors, operators, and compliance officers need to know where these risks lie. By identifying the most common red flags, stakeholders can structure deals more carefully, strengthen compliance programs, and avoid costly enforcement actions.

Marketing plays an important role in expanding patient acc

Healthcare transactions often involve two of the most significant federal fraud and abuse laws: the physician self-referral law, commonly known as the Stark Law, and the Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”). Both regulate financial relationships in healthcare, both carry serious penalties for violations, and both frequently arise in the same deals. But they operate differently, and confusing them can leave organizations exposed.

Executives, investors, operators, and compliance officers need to understand the distinctions between these statutes, how they interact, and why compliance with one does not guarantee compliance with the other.

The Stark Law prohibits physicians from referring Medicare patients for certain designated

The Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) sets the rules of the road for financial relationships in healthcare. But enforcement priorities shift over time as new business models emerge, healthcare delivery evolves, and regulators sharpen their focus. For executives, investors, operators, and compliance officers, understanding current enforcement trends is just as important as knowing the statute itself.

In recent years, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) have expanded investigations, brought more cases, and coordinated with whistleblowers at record levels. These efforts signal where the government sees the greatest risk — and where healthcare stakeholders must exercise the most caut

The Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) casts a wide net over financial relationships in healthcare. Without limits, the statute could chill legitimate business arrangements that support patient care and innovation. To balance enforcement with practical business realities, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) has established a series of “safe harbors.” These regulatory provisions protect specific types of arrangements from AKS liability if stakeholders satisfy all requirements.

Understanding how safe harbors work, and where arrangements fall short, is essential for structuring deals with confidence.

Safe harbors provide clarity in an otherwise uncertain environment. When

The Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”), is one of the most important healthcare laws in the United States, affecting stakeholders across the healthcare industry. Lawmakers designed the AKS to protect patients and federal healthcare programs from financial conflicts of interest, and they drafted it broadly to give regulators powerful enforcement authority.

With heightened U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) enforcement, increased whistleblower activity, and the rapid growth of telehealth, private equity-backed platforms, and value-based care models, understanding AKS risk is essential, whether you’re structuring an acquisition, negotiating c