Asking for Forgiveness – Not Permission

 With reimbursement for telehealth therapy being held up, providers are faced with a troublesome choice.

This is going to be controversial, but there are times when the smartest course is to disregard the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) guidance. In addition, in some cases, it is better to make a decision about whether to engage in activity without seeking permission. 

During the April 13 episode of Monitor Mondays, I offered my analysis of why you can bill for telehealth provided by a physical, occupational, or speech-language pathologist, as long as it’s done incident to a physician in a clinic setting. The next day, during CMS office hours, CMS employees stated that the current Medicare policy doesn’t allow telehealth by therapists to be billed incident-to. 

So, what do you do? If I ran a medical practice, despite the comments on the call, I would provide the therapy via telehealth and bill it. Why? I think the legal argument is solid. Can I give you an absolute guarantee it will prevail? Of course not, but again, the reasoning is sound, and during the call, CMS made it clear that they want to pay for telehealth physical therapy, they just need to find a legal way to make it work.   

This argument provides a clear path forward. I’ve sent my analysis to CMS, and I’m befuddled by the fact that they haven’t adopted it, but it’s important to understand that even though CMS has done a truly amazing job at making modifications to policies to adapt for COVID-19, government officials, like everyone else, can make mistakes. If you believe that CMS is wrong, it’s appropriate to provide the services and bill. If the service is denied, you’ll get your day in court. One interesting practical issue:  unless you’re willing to take the risk of billing the service, it is very difficult to get before a judge.  Twenty years ago, in 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Shalala v. Illinois Council on Long Term Care, Inc., ruling that in most cases, a healthcare organization may not seek a declaratory action to have a law invalidated. Instead, you must wait for an audit or sanction from the government and then appeal. Failure to do so is a “failure to exhaust your administrative remedies.” Under this principle, it is expected that you will bill and face the consequences of an audit. Perhaps you will be able to convince a court to hear your request for declaratory judgment, but it’s definitely an uphill battle.

If you’re trying to solve a problem during this crisis, and you are considering action and you aren’t certain how CMS or another payor will view it, one question is whether to ask, or whether you act off of your own risk assessment. I recently had a client ask whether they needed to list a physician’s home address on a claim if the physician provided telehealth from home. I replied that even before the COVID-19 situation if the physician was using his or her home infrequently, guidance from CMS justified a decision to bill with the clinic address. Moreover, I don’t like the idea of using that address; it could expose the physician to angry patients. Why advertise their home address? The client liked that answer, but still opted to seek guidance from the CMS Regional Office. The Regional Office stated that CMS guidance confirms that it is not necessary to enroll a physician’s home office, but then claimed, without citation, that if the physician provides services from home, the home address must appear on the claim form. I am not sure that CMS in Baltimore would agree with this assertion, although I think they may not. But I do not recommend asking. Having the wrong address on a claim doesn’t create an overpayment. Whether the service was provided in a clinic or in a home doesn’t seem material, and so the risk of facing false claims liability is de minimis. In a situation like that, it is reasonable to rely on counsel’s recommendation and bill using the clinic address.

There’s no real upside to seeking permission. If someone claims your bill was “wrong,” there is unlikely to be a material consequence. Given that, choose the course that keeps your physicians safe. 

Programming Note: Healthcare attorney David Glaser is a permanent panelist on Monitor Mondays. Listen to his live reporting this coming Monday during a special 60-minute townhall edition of Monitor Mondays, 10 -11 a.m. EST.

 

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

David M. Glaser, Esq.

David M. Glaser is a shareholder in Fredrikson & Byron's Health Law Group. David assists clinics, hospitals, and other health care entities negotiate the maze of healthcare regulations, providing advice about risk management, reimbursement, and business planning issues. He has considerable experience in healthcare regulation and litigation, including compliance, criminal and civil fraud investigations, and reimbursement disputes. David's goal is to explain the government's enforcement position, and to analyze whether this position is supported by the law or represents government overreaching. David is a member of the RACmonitor editorial board and is a popular guest on Monitor Mondays.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

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

Featured Webcasts

One Chart, Five Truths: How CDI Prevents the Same Diagnosis from Becoming Five Different Outcomes

What happens when everyone reviews the same chart, but reaches a different conclusion? In this case-based clinical documentation integrity (CDI) webcast, Penny Jefferson examines how documentation involving clinical support, timing, causation, linkage, and terminology can produce very different outcomes for ICD-10 coding, reimbursement, quality, risk adjustment, medical necessity, denials, and compliance. Using cases involving postoperative respiratory failure, severe malnutrition, and encephalopathy, you’ll learn the practical CLEAR framework to help attendees learn to evaluate whether a diagnosis is codeable, consistent, specific, reportable, and ultimately defensible across the different teams and systems that rely on the medical record.

September 30, 2026

Mastering Spinal Fusion Coding for Inpatient Facilities: ICD-10-PCS Precision, Documentation, and MS-DRG Impact

Spinal fusion cases are among the most complex inpatient procedures to code, where even minor ICD-10-PCS errors can affect MS-DRG assignment, reimbursement, compliance, and audit outcomes. This practical webcast provides a step-by-step framework for interpreting operative reports, assigning accurate ICD-10-PCS codes, recognizing documentation gaps, and confidently coding complex fusion procedures. You’ll leave with practical tools that improve coding accuracy, reduce denials and audit risk, and strengthen documentation-driven reimbursement decisions.

July 29, 2026

AI, Audits, and the Future of the Revenue Cycle

Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming healthcare revenue cycle operations, from coding and auditing to compliance and denials. Join industry leaders Pam Warren (MaineHealth) and Raemarie Jimenez (AAPC) for a live fireside chat exploring how AI is changing workflows, workforce roles, payer-provider dynamics, and compliance risk—and what organizations should be doing now to prepare.

Webcast Only Available On ICD10monitor Subscription – Subscribe Below

June 17, 2026

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Radiation Oncology Fundamentals: Coding, Billing & Compliance for Hospital Outpatient & Professional Services

Join Michael Calahan, PA, MBA for this radiation oncology coding and compliance webcast as he explains the fundamentals of coding, billing, reporting, and documentation for hospital outpatient and professional services. Learn how the 2026 radiation therapy coding changes affect current practices, how to distinguish technical and professional services, and how to address bundling, units, frequency, modifiers, and documentation requirements. Michael will also help you identify radiation oncology coding and billing vulnerabilities that could lead to denials, overpayments, repayment demands, or federal audit exposure.

October 20, 2026

CMS Compliance & Audit Readiness Bundle

Get two essential perspectives on CMS compliance for $199.

The Two-Midnight Rule helps you navigate short-stay admissions, patient status, and evolving 2026-2027 requirements, while CMS CRUSH explores the next wave of program integrity, payment oversight, and data-driven scrutiny.

Two RACmonitor webcasts. One practical approach to preparing for increased CMS oversight.

September 20, 2026

Preparing for 2027: Inpatient & Outpatient Policy Changes for Case Management and Utilization Review

The 2027 CMS policy changes will impact case management, utilization review, reimbursement, and patient status decision-making long before they officially take effect. Join nationally recognized physician advisor Dr. Ronald Hirsch as he explains the finalized and proposed inpatient and outpatient rule changes, expanding bundled payment initiatives, payment updates, and evolving payer expectations. Gain practical guidance to help your organization prepare early, strengthen compliance, reduce reimbursement risk, and confidently navigate the transition to 2027.

September 17, 2026

Trending News

Celebrate Lab Week with MedLearn! Sign up to win one year of our Laboratory All Access Pass! Click here to learn more →

Have a Medicare regulation question you’d love Dr. Hirsch to answer? Now is your chance! CLICK HERE to learn more→

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 →

This Memorial Day, we honor those who gave all for our freedom. Take 20% off sitewide through May 29 with code MEMORIAL26 at checkout

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25

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