Client Alerts & Insights
Health Information Privacy Provisions in the Stimulus Bill
February 1, 2009
Authored By:
Tucked into economic stimulation provisions of the Stimulus Bill is a set of changes to the health care information privacy rules created under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”). (Stimulus Bill, Part A, Title XIII, Sections 13,400 et seq.) The HIPAA Privacy Rule set forth at 45 CFR Parts 160, 164 has long needed attention to various gaps that have been found in its treatment of protected health information (“PHI”), a concept referring to personally identifiable health information.
Generally speaking, the HIPAA Privacy Rule limits the use of a patients’ PHI to uses connected with the patients’ treatment, payment, public health matters, and other health care operations. Beyond these limited purposes, the patient has a general right to object to the disclosure of PHI.
The HIPAA Privacy Rule permits the disclosure of PHI to a limited category of “business associates” of health care providers and health plans, to enable these associates to fulfill support functions for the providers and health plans. However, the HIPAA Privacy Rule requires that each business associate execute a written contract ensuring that any PHI it receives will be appropriately safeguarded.
In addition to the privacy aspects of the HIPAA Privacy Rule, it also contains security standards designed to safeguard PHI in electronic form against unauthorized access, use, and disclosure. Those security standards have largely been codified in the Stimulus Bill.
The Stimulus Bill codifies the definitions of the following key privacy and security terms: breach; business associate; covered entity; disclosure; electronic health record; electronic medical record; health care operations; health care provider; health plan; National Coordinator; payment; personal health record; protected health information; secretary; security; state; treatment; use; and vendors of personal health records.
Certain of these terms have been modified from their original definitions in the HIPAA Privacy Rule. For example, “breach” has been redefined to make it clear that some inadvertent disclosures of PHI can be a breach.
A second modification is to the definition of “Personal Health Records” to clarify that PHR are “managed, shared and controlled by or primarily for the individual.” This change excludes health related information maintained for commercial purposes, such as information maintained by life insurance companies.
The Stimulus Bill addresses the administrative, physical and technical safeguard provisions of the HIPAA Privacy Rule, largely codifying these provisions with some important exceptions.
One of the most significant changes in the Stimulus Bill is that the HIPAA security standards, and the civil and criminal penalties for violating those standards, will now apply to “business associates” in the same manner they apply to the providers and health plans for which they are working. An additional significant change is the imposition of a requirement that a breach of PHI security must be reported to each individual whose PHI was released in the breach. Moreover, if 500 or more individuals are impacted by a breach, a covered entity must report the breach to the Secretary of HHS and, to major media outlets in the area that was impacted.
The Stimulus Bill also tightens other redisclosure aspects of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. In part, the Stimulus Bill addresses this issue by imposing stricter limitations on personal health information that is redisclosed in the form of limited data sets to third parties. The goals of these provisions is to generally avoid redisclosure of PHI unless the disclosure is specifically authorized by the individual and/or has been “deidentified” to protect the individual’s identity.
The Stimulus Bill also addressed the continuing controversy over the use of PHI to market health care products and services. The existing HIPAA Privacy Rule generally bars the redisclosure of PHI to third parties for the purpose of marketing health care products and services.
In the Stimulus Bill, covered entities will now be barred from using PHI in their possession for the purpose of marketing any health care products or services without the individual’s consent, under most circumstances in which they receive payment from third parties for those marketing efforts. Similarly, covered entities will now be extremely limited in their use of PHI for fundraising purposes.
Finally, the Stimulus Bill dramatically strengthens the enforcement provisions of HIPAA, and enhances the penalties available. In the future, Justice Department enforcement will be backstopped by the OCR and potential actions by State Attorneys General.
Both OCR and the State Attorneys General will be permitted to seek civil monetary penalties, and the Attorneys General will also be permitted to seek injunctive relief for violations of the security and privacy standards of HIPAA, as modified in the Stimulus Bill.
Additional Information
For additional information, please contact:
William Todd at wtodd@beneschlaw.com or 614.223.9348
Frank Carsonie at fcarsonie@beneschlaw.com or 614.223.9361
Latest News
The Coming State-Law Litigation Wave of 2026-27: “Subscription Trap” Class Actions
The subscription economy keeps growing—and so does the wave of class-action litigation targeting it. While the FTC’s regulatory efforts have drawn headlines, private class actions under state laws pose an even greater exposure risk.
Updates to Fees and Grace Periods for Nonimmigrant Visas
Starting September 9, 2026, the 9-11 Response Biometric Entry-Exit Fee will apply to H-1B and L-1 extension petitions filed by employers subject to the fee. Prior to the new rule, the fee was only required for (1) initial grant of status to a foreign national seeking H-1B or L-1 status and (2) a change of employer in the same status.
Third Circuit Decision Reshapes Creditor Standing in Successor Liability Disputes
The Third Circuit recently held that when determining whether a successor liability claim belongs to a bankruptcy estate, the key question is whether the claim seeks to remedy harm suffered by all creditors collectively or a unique injury suffered by a specific creditor. The fact that creditors may be permitted to bring the claim outside of bankruptcy is not, by itself, determinative.
CMS Proposes Sweeping Restrictions on Remote Patient Monitoring: The Outsourcing Ban, Reimbursement Revaluation and Potential Code Consolidation in the CY 2027 Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule
CMS’s CY 2027 Proposed Rule would significantly restrict Medicare reimbursement for Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) and Remote Therapeutic Monitoring (RTM), including banning outsourced clinical staffing, adding new patient-relationship and initiating-visit requirements, reducing certain reimbursement rates, and exploring consolidation of existing billing codes.