title: Special report on antitrust. Criminal antitrust enforcement--when, who, and why?
abstract: Government civil antitrust enforcement and private antitrust litigation are not always easy to avoid, because even innocent actions can be alleged to have been improperly motivated or to adversely affect competition. On the other hand, criminal antitrust violations can be readily avoided by following a set of basic, simple, and easy to remember rules: 1. Providers should not agree with competing or potentially competing providers on any terms of price, quantity, or quality of service; 2. Providers should not agree with competing or potentially competing providers as to which patients (or payors) will be served, what kinds of services will be offered, or where to locate offices or facilities; and 3. Providers should not agree with competing or potentially competing providers to refuse to offer services to payors or other alternative delivery systems. There are circumstances in which exceptions to these general rules are appropriate, such as when an agreement among providers is necessary in order to participate in a legitimate alternative delivery system, preferred provider organization, or individual practice association. However, these exceptions are narrow and technical. The best advice is the following warning to providers by Charles F. Rule, former U.S. Assistant Attorney General for antitrust: "You should never act as if an exception applies until after you have consulted an experienced antitrust lawyer or until you have obtained adequate assurance that competent counsel has structured the system to eliminate antitrust problems."
authors: R J
authors: RJ
authors: Enders
mesh_terms: D016363:Antitrust Laws / Q000458:organization & administration*; D003416:Criminal Law / Q000458:organization & administration*; D004465:Economic Competition; D006739:Hospital Administration / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D011216:Practice Management, Medical / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D014481:United States