The Legislative Plight of 340B

The Legislative Plight of 340B

In December 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal challenging an Arkansas law requiring pharmaceutical companies to provide drug discounts through third-party contract pharmacies associated with hospitals serving low-income populations.

This decision was hailed as a victory for rural patients’ access to affordable medications. ​

The 340B Drug Pricing Program, established in 1992, was designed to enable hospitals and clinics serving vulnerable populations to purchase outpatient drugs at discounted prices. This initiative aimed to stretch scarce federal resources, allowing these healthcare providers to offer comprehensive services to underserved communities.

Recently, however, the program has been at the center of legal disputes between hospitals and the government, particularly concerning reimbursement rates and the use of contract pharmacies. Recent settlements and court rulings have underscored the legal reasoning supporting hospitals’ positions, emphasizing their commitment to patient care and adherence to statutory provisions.​

Supreme Court Ruling on Medicare Reimbursements

A pivotal moment in the 340B legal landscape occurred on June 15, 2022, when the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of hospitals in the case of American Hospital Association versus Becerra. The Court determined that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had unlawfully reduced Medicare reimbursement rates for 340B hospitals without conducting a mandated survey of hospitals’ acquisition costs.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the Court, emphasized that HHS’s actions were inconsistent with the statutory framework, which requires either uniform reimbursement rates or data-driven adjustments based on hospital acquisition costs. The Court’s decision highlighted the importance of adhering to legislative intent and ensuring that any alterations to reimbursement methodologies are grounded in empirical data. ​

Legal Reasoning Supporting Hospitals

Hospitals have consistently argued that the 340B program’s intent is to support healthcare providers serving low-income and rural communities by offering them access to discounted medications. These discounts enable hospitals to reinvest savings into patient care services, such as expanding access to treatments, offering community health programs, and covering uncompensated care costs.

The legal contention centers around the interpretation of the Medicare statute, which stipulates specific procedures for setting reimbursement rates. Hospitals maintain that HHS overstepped its authority by implementing rate reductions without conducting the requisite acquisition cost surveys, thereby violating the clear directives established by Congress. ​

Contract Pharmacies and State Legislation

Another significant aspect of the 340B program involves the use of contract pharmacies—third-party entities that dispense medications on behalf of 340B-covered entities. Hospitals argue that contract pharmacies are essential for extending the reach of the 340B program, especially in rural or underserved areas where the hospitals themselves may not have in-house pharmacies.

Legal disputes have arisen as some pharmaceutical manufacturers have sought to limit the distribution of discounted drugs through these contract pharmacies. In response, several states have enacted laws mandating that drug manufacturers honor 340B discounts even when drugs are dispensed via contract pharmacies.

Financial Implications and Hospital Advocacy

The financial stakes in these legal battles are substantial. The Supreme Court noted that HHS’s reimbursement reductions had an annual economic impact of approximately $1.6 billion on 340B hospitals. Hospitals contend that such cuts undermine their ability to provide essential services to vulnerable populations.

The American Hospital Association and other advocacy groups have emphasized that the Medicare payments at issue help offset the considerable costs incurred by 340B providers in delivering care to uninsured and underinsured patients. They argue that the redistribution of funds away from safety-net hospitals to other facilities exacerbates disparities in healthcare access and outcomes. ​

Conclusion

The legal disputes surrounding the 340B program underscore a fundamental tension between regulatory agencies’ policy objectives and the statutory mandates established by Congress. Hospitals have successfully argued that adherence to the legislative framework is crucial to preserving the program’s integrity and ensuring that vulnerable populations continue to receive necessary medical services. The recent Supreme Court ruling and state-level legislative actions affirm the legal reasoning supporting hospitals’ positions, highlighting the judiciary’s role in upholding statutory provisions designed to promote equitable healthcare.

Multiple states have submitted bills into their legislature to maintain 340B as a tool regardless litigation.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Knicole C. Emanuel Esq.

For more than 20 years, Knicole has maintained a health care litigation practice, concentrating on Medicare and Medicaid litigation, health care regulatory compliance, administrative law and regulatory law. Knicole has tried over 2,000 administrative cases in over 30 states and has appeared before multiple states’ medical boards. She has successfully obtained federal injunctions in numerous states, which allowed health care providers to remain in business despite the state or federal laws allegations of health care fraud, abhorrent billings, and data mining. Across the country, Knicole frequently lectures on health care law, the impact of the Affordable Care Act and regulatory compliance for providers, including physicians, home health and hospice, dentists, chiropractors, hospitals and durable medical equipment providers. Knicole is partner at Nelson Mullins and a member of the RACmonitor editorial board and a popular panelist on Monitor Monday.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

2026 IPPS Masterclass 3: Master MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 3: MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

This third session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review of FY26 changes to the MS-DRG methodology and new technology add-on payments (NTAPs), presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 14, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

This second session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review the FY26 changes to ICD-10-PCS codes. This information will be presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 13, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

This first session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature an in-depth explanation of FY26 changes to ICD-10-CM codes and guidelines, CCs/MCCs, and revisions to the MCE, presented by presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 12, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

RACmonitor is proud to welcome back Dr. Ronald Hirsch, one of his most requested webcasts. In this highly anticipated session, Dr. Hirsch will break down the complex Two Midnight Rule Medicare regulations, translating them into clear, actionable guidance. He’ll walk you through the basics of the rule, offer expert interpretation, and apply the rule to real-world clinical scenarios—so you leave with greater clarity, confidence, and the tools to ensure compliance.

June 19, 2025
Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Bring your questions and join the conversation during this open forum series, live every Wednesday at 10 a.m. EST from June 11–July 30. Hosted by Chuck Buck, these fast-paced 30-minute sessions connect you directly with top healthcare experts tackling today’s most urgent compliance and policy issues.

June 11, 2025
Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Substance abuse is everywhere. It’s a complicated diagnosis with wide-ranging implications well beyond acute care. The face of addiction continues to change so it’s important to remember not just the addict but the spectrum of extended victims and the other social determinants and legal ramifications. Join John K. Hall, MD, JD, MBA, FCLM, FRCPC, for a critical Q&A on navigating substance abuse in 2025.  Register today and be a part of the conversation!

July 16, 2025

Trending News

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24