Company has obtained all of these necessary licenses.
To the extent that the Company operates or is deemed to operate in some states as an insurance company, HMO, PPO or similar entity, it may be required to comply with certain laws and regulations that, among other things, may require the Company to maintain certain types of assets and minimum levels of deposits, capital, surplus, reserves or net worth. Being licensed as an insurance company, HMO or similar entity could also subject the Company to regulations governing reporting and disclosure, coverage, mandated benefits, rate setting, grievances and appeals, prompt pay laws and other traditional insurance regulatory requirements.
Regulators in a few states have adopted policies that require HMOs or, in some instances, insurance companies, to contract directly with licensed healthcare providers, entities or provider groups, such as IPAs, for the provision of treatment services, rather than with unlicensed intermediary companies. In such states, the Company’s customary model of contracting directly is modified so that, for example, the IPAs (rather than the Company) contract directly with the HMO or insurance company, as appropriate, for the provision of treatment services.
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) has developed a “health organizations risk-based capital” formula, designed specifically for managed care organizations, that establishes a minimum amount of capital necessary for a managed care organization to support its overall operations, allowing consideration for the organization’s size and risk profile. The NAIC also adopted a model regulation in the area of health plan standards, which could be adopted by individual states in whole or in part, and could result in the Company being required to meet additional or new standards in connection with its existing operations. Certain states, for example, have adopted regulations based on the NAIC initiative, and as a result, the Company has been subject to certain minimum capital requirements in those states. Certain other states, such as Maryland, Texas, New York, Florida and New Jersey, have also adopted their own regulatory initiatives that subject entities, such as certain of the Company’s subsidiaries, to regulation under state insurance laws. This includes, but is not limited to, requiring adherence to specific financial solvency standards. State insurance laws and regulations may limit the Company’s ability to pay dividends, make certain investments and repay certain indebtedness.
Regulators may impose operational restrictions on entities granted licenses to operate as insurance companies or HMOs. For example, the California Department of Managed Health Care has imposed certain restrictions on the ability of the Company’s California subsidiaries to fund the Company’s operations in other states, to guarantee or cosign for the Company’s financial obligations, or to pledge or hypothecate the stock of these subsidiaries and on the Company’s ability to make certain operational changes with respect to these subsidiaries. In addition, regulators of certain of the Company’s subsidiaries may exercise certain discretionary rights under regulations including, without limitation, increasing its supervision of such entities or requiring additional restricted cash or other security.
Failure to obtain and maintain required licenses typically also constitutes an event of default under the Company’s contracts with its customers. The loss of business from one or more of the Company’s major customers as a result of an event of default or otherwise could have a material adverse effect on the Company. Licensure requirements may increase the Company’s cost of doing business in the event that compliance requires the Company to retain additional personnel to meet the regulatory requirements and to take other required actions and make necessary filings. Although compliance with licensure regulations has not had a material adverse effect on the Company, there can be no assurance that specific laws or regulations adopted in the future would not have such a result.
The provision of healthcare treatment services by physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, pharmacists and other providers is subject to state regulation with respect to the licensing of healthcare professionals. The Company believes that the healthcare professionals, who provide healthcare treatment on behalf of or under contracts with the Company, and the case managers and other personnel of the health services business, are in compliance with the applicable state licensing requirements and current interpretations thereof. Regulations imposed upon healthcare providers include but are not limited to, provisions relating to the conduct of, and ethical considerations involved in, the practice of medicine, psychiatry, psychology, social work and related behavioral healthcare professions, radiology, pharmacy, privacy, accreditation, government healthcare program participation requirements, reimbursements for patient services, Medicare, Medicaid, federal and state laws governing fraud, waste and abuse and, in certain cases, the common law or statutory duty to warn others of danger or to prevent patient self-injury or the statutory duties to report matters of abuse or neglect of individuals. However, there can be no assurance that changes in such requirements or interpretations thereof will not adversely affect the Company’s existing operations or limit expansion.