Workers' Compensation Claims and the Medicare Secondary Payer Act
Meeting Reporting Requirements, Satisfying Liens, and Establishing Set-Asides in Settlements
Recording of a 90-minute CLE webinar with Q&A
This CLE webinar will provide workers’ compensation counsel with a review of the MSP Act, Section 111, and Medicare set-aside arrangements. The panel will discuss the differences between workers’ comp and other personal injury claims—and how to protect the client’s and Medicare’s interests during settlement. The panelist will also cover recent developments, including CMS’ Workers’ Compensation Medicare Set-Aside Arrangement Reference guide, issued in April 2016, so attendees will receive the most up-to-date information to address these compliance issues at the lowest cost to the client.
- Medicare Secondary Payer
- Statutory analysis of conditional payments
- Statutory analysis of MSAs
- Statutory analysis of MMSEA Section 111 reporting
- MMSEA Section 111
- What triggers MMSEA Section 111?
- Reporting nuts and bolts
- Low dollar thresholds
- Conditional payments
- The CRC – a new process for E/Cs
- CPNs vs. CPLs – a distinction with a difference
- Future medicals and MSAs
- MSAs in accepted WC claims
- MSAs in denied WC claims
- MSP changes in 2017
- New WCMSA review contractor
The panelist will review these and other key issues:
- What are the responsibilities for counsel regarding Medicare’s interests when settling a workers’ comp case?
- What are the new reporting requirements of Section 111—and who is responsible for compliance?
- When is a Medicare set-aside agreement needed? How should it be established?
John V. Cattie, Jr.
Mr. Cattie focuses his law practice exclusively on MSP and MSA issues, providing legal opinions regarding reporting and... | Read More
Mr. Cattie focuses his law practice exclusively on MSP and MSA issues, providing legal opinions regarding reporting and repayment obligations as well as assessing a client’s future medical exposure under the MSP Act. In the MSA area, he has personally reviewed or overseen the review of over 10,000 distinct fact patterns. Federal and state court opinions such as Smith v. Marine Terminals of Arkansas, Tye v. Upper Valley Medical Center, and Doe v. Company X cite his analysis favorably.Close