Publication
“Do State Bans of Most-Favored-Nation Contract Clauses Restrain Price Growth? Evidence From Hospital Prices”
Daniel R. Arnold, Katherine L. Gudiksen, Jaime S. King, Brent D. Fulton, Richard M. Scheffler
May 11, 2022
Most-favored-nation (MFN) contract clauses have recently garnered attention from both Congress and state legislatures looking for ways to curtail market power abuses in health care and rein in prices. In health care, a typical MFN contract clause is stipulated by the insurer and requires a health care provider to grant the insurer the lowest (i.e., the most-favored) price among the insurers it contracts with. As of August 2020, 20 states restrict the use of MFN clauses in health care contracts (19 states ban their use in at least some health care contracts), with 8 states prohibiting their use between 2010 and 2016.
Source Sightings
California’s Sutter Health Settlement: What States Can Learn About Protecting Residents from the Effects of Health Care Provider Consolidation
Jaime King, et al.
September 23, 2020
CHS’ Texas hospital sales could raise costs, lower quality: FTC
Tim Greaney
September 15, 2020
Surprise Billing: A Window into the U.S. Health Care System
Tim Greaney
September 8, 2020
Preventing Anticompetitive Contracting Practices in Healthcare Markets
Katherine L. Gudiksen, et al.
September 8, 2020
State Efforts to Address Health Care Consolidation and Costs
Katie Gudiksen
August 21, 2020