Ad
related to: stark anti kickback safe harbors system trainingnsc.org has been visited by 10K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Stark Law is a set of United States federal laws that prohibit physician self-referral, specifically a referral by a physician of a Medicare or Medicaid patient to an entity for the provision of designated health services ("DHS") if the physician (or an immediate family member) has a financial relationship with that entity.
The Anti-Kickback Statute [1] (AKS) is an American federal law prohibiting financial payments or incentives for referring patients or generating federal healthcare business. . The law, codified at 42 U.S. Code § 1320a–7b(b), [2] imposes criminal and, particularly in association with the federal False Claims Act, civil liability on those who knowingly and willfully offer, solicit, receive ...
The Anti-Kickback Enforcement Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99–634, 100 Stat. 3523, enacted November 7, 1986, originally codified at 41 U.S.C. § 51 et seq., recodified at 41 U.S.C. ch. 87) modernized and closed the loopholes of previous statutes applying to government contractors.
Safe harbor provisions appear in a number of laws and in many contracts. An example of safe harbor in a real estate transaction is the performance of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment by a property purchaser: creating a "safe harbor" protecting the new owner if, in the future, contamination caused by a prior owner is found. Another common ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
We believe that the existing AMS system for inbound cargo and the AES system for outbound cargo should serve this function. This provision also requires the Secretary to develop performance standards to enhance the physical security of shipping containers, seals and locks. Efforts are underway to establish standards for container seals.
Many Stark County bar and restaurant owners say they aren't opposed to training — especially if it limits their liability in lawsuits — but some question the cost and whether it would be ...
In addition to the two general requirements listed above, all four safe harbors impose additional requirements for immunity. The safe harbor for storage of infringing material under § 512(c) is the most commonly encountered because it immunizes OSPs such as YouTube that might inadvertently host infringing material uploaded by users.