STOCK TITAN

Fifth Circuit Rejects "Ghost Rates" in Federal QPA Calculations Under the No Surprises Act

(Moderate)
(Very Negative)
Tags

Nutex Health (NASDAQ: NUTX)/b) commented on an Aug. 11, 2026 en banc ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that invalidated key federal rules for calculating the qualifying payment amount (QPA) under the No Surprises Act. The court rejected use of non‑negotiated “ghost rates” and held that excluding bonus and incentive payments from QPA calculations conflicted with the statute’s “total maximum payment” standard, while upholding exclusion of single‑case agreements. Nutex Health said prior QPA methods had depressed out‑of‑network payments, forcing frequent use of the Independent Dispute Resolution (IDR) process, where certified entities selected payment amounts above the insurer QPA in about 85% of decided cases. Patient balance‑billing protections remain unchanged. The company noted that new agency rules, their timing, and the ultimate financial impact are uncertain, and current enforcement relief allows prior QPA methodologies for services furnished before October 1, 2026.

Loading...
Loading translation...

Positive

  • Fifth Circuit ruling limits ghost rates in QPA calculations, potentially reducing downward pressure from unnegotiated placeholder rates used by insurers.
  • Court requires inclusion of bonuses and incentives in QPA, aligning calculations with the statute’s “total maximum payment” definition and potentially raising benchmark amounts in future disputes.
  • IDR awards exceeded insurer QPA in ~85% of decided cases, highlighting that prior QPA methodologies often produced lower figures than amounts selected by arbitrators.

Negative

  • Timing and content of new federal QPA rules are unknown, creating regulatory uncertainty for Nutex Health’s future out‑of‑network reimbursement environment.
  • Prior QPA methodologies may continue through at least October 1, 2026, meaning current payment dynamics and related hardship for providers could persist in the near term.

News Explained

The August 11 ruling changes the future QPA framework, but prior methods remain available for services before October 1 pending new rules.

On August 11, 2026, the Fifth Circuit held en banc that certain federal rules for calculating qualifying payment amounts under the No Surprises Act were unlawful, and Nutex is commenting on that court ruling.

The disclosed consequence is conditional: after new rules are promulgated, insurers will have to recalculate QPAs to exclude nonzero unnegotiated placeholder rates and include bonus and incentive payments, potentially changing the benchmark used in out-of-network payment disputes involving providers such as Nutex.

The QPA is an insurer-calculated median payment figure that an independent arbitrator considers, alongside other factors, when resolving an out-of-network payment dispute.

The ruling does not change patients' protections for covered out-of-network emergency care or out-of-network care at an in-network facility, including limits on patient cost-sharing and balance billing.

The court also upheld excluding one-off single-case agreements from the QPA calculation, while rejecting the different treatment of zero-dollar and nonzero unnegotiated placeholder rates.

Current enforcement relief permits insurers to use prior QPA methods for services furnished before October 1, 2026, while implementing rules have not been issued and further appeal or rehearing remains possible.

The specified resolution points are the agencies' implementing rules, any further appeal, and whether the enforcement relief is extended beyond October 1, 2026.

Market Context

NUTX's Q1 2026 earnings event recorded a 17.09% 24-hour reaction, giving this regulatory announcemen...
Analysis

NUTX's Q1 2026 earnings event recorded a 17.09% 24-hour reaction, giving this regulatory announcement a company-specific comparison point. The platform record adds context, while further appeal and unissued implementing rules remained risks to monitor.

Key Figures

Care facilities: 28 facilities Operating states: 12 states Court ruling date: Aug. 11, 2026 +5 more
8 metrics
Care facilities 28 facilities Company description
Operating states 12 states Company description
Court ruling date Aug. 11, 2026 Fifth Circuit en banc decision
Issues decided 2 of 3 issues Texas Medical Association case
Higher IDR awards Approximately 85% of decided cases Certified IDR entities selected amounts above insurer-calculated QPAs
Excluded contracted rate $0 Ghost rates excluded under the prior QPA rule
Placeholder rates As low as $1 Nonzero unnegotiated rates permitted under the prior rule
Enforcement relief cutoff October 1, 2026 Prior QPA methodologies permitted for services furnished before this date

Historical Context

5 past events · Latest: Aug 18 (Positive)
Pattern 5 events
Date Event Sentiment 24h Move Catalyst
Aug 18 Hospital opening Positive -0.7% New Arkansas emergency hospital expanded the company's stated nationwide facility footprint.
Aug 06 Q2 earnings report Positive +6.7% Profitability improved sharply despite lower revenue, alongside higher EBITDA and operating cash flow.
Jul 21 Earnings scheduling Neutral +4.2% Company announced the second-quarter filing, release, and conference-call dates.
Apr 30 Q1 earnings report Positive +17.1% Revenue, net income, EBITDA, and operating cash flow all increased year over year.
Apr 22 Earnings scheduling Neutral +0.8% Company scheduled the first-quarter results release and conference call for late April and early May.

24h Move is the share-price change in the day after each event; other market factors may also have contributed.

Pattern Detected

Positive earnings announcements aligned with positive reactions, while operational and scheduling news produced divergent reactions.

Key Terms

independent dispute resolution, en banc
2 terms
independent dispute resolution regulatory
"the Independent Dispute Resolution (IDR) process"
An independent dispute resolution is a process where a neutral third party — such as an outside mediator, arbitrator, or panel — reviews and decides on conflicts between a company and its stakeholders (investors, customers, regulators) instead of the company handling it internally. For investors this matters because it can produce a fairer, clearer outcome, reduce the risk of biased or prolonged internal fights, and protect value by resolving issues more quickly and transparently — like bringing in an impartial referee to settle a contested call.
en banc regulatory
"while sitting en banc, that certain federal agency rules"
En banc describes a legal review where an entire appellate court, rather than its usual smaller group of judges, hears a case. For investors, an en banc rehearing can raise the stakes because a full-court decision is more likely to overturn earlier rulings or set a stronger precedent that affects regulatory outcomes, company liabilities, or industry rules — think of it like a full-board meeting revisiting a decision originally made by a small committee.

AI-generated analysis. How Rhea-AI works. Not financial advice.

See more from StockTitan in Google Search and AI answers. Adds StockTitan as a preferred source · opens Google
Add on Google

HOUSTON, Aug. 25, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Nutex Health Inc. ("Nutex Health" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: NUTX), a physician-led, integrated health care delivery system comprised of 28 state-of-the-art micro hospitals and hospital outpatient departments in 12 states, as well as primary care-centric, risk-bearing physician networks, today commented on a recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit invalidating key portions of federal regulations governing calculation of the qualifying payment amount (QPA) under the No Surprises Act (NSA).

"We applaud the court's decision on this important issue," said Tom Vo, M.D., MBA, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Nutex Health. "Since the NSA took effect in 2022, the agencies had directed the insurers to include non-negotiated ghost rates, artificially deflating the QPA calculations. The resulting depressed payments have created significant hardship for providers such as Nutex Health. As a result, providers have often had to pursue the Independent Dispute Resolution (IDR) process simply to obtain fair median in-network rates, an approach that is time-consuming and costly for both insurers and providers. We hope this landmark ruling will lead to fair and reasonable upfront payments, allowing us to continue delivering high-quality care to our patients."

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held Aug. 11, 2026, while sitting en banc, that certain federal agency rules governing calculation of the QPA under the NSA were unlawful. The QPA is a benchmark figure calculated by insurers and used, alongside other factors, in the law's IDR process for resolving out-of-network payment disputes. The court ruled in favor of the Texas Medical Association and co-plaintiffs on two of the three issues raised. The decision may be subject to further appeal or rehearing.

Patient Protections Are Unaffected

The disputes addressed by this ruling are between insurers and providers. Under the NSA, patients receiving out-of-network emergency care, or out-of-network care at an in-network facility, are responsible only for their normal in-network cost-sharing amount and cannot be balance-billed. Nothing in this decision changes those patient protections.

Background on the QPA and IDR Process

Under the NSA, when a provider and an insurer cannot agree on payment for out-of-network care, the dispute may be submitted to an independent arbitrator, who weighs several factors equally, including the provider's training and experience, case complexity, market share, and the QPA. The QPA is calculated by the insurer and is intended to reflect the median, across the insurer's contracts for the same service, specialty, and region, of each contract's "total maximum payment," the patient's cost-sharing amount plus the amount paid by the plan.

The Court's Holding

The Fifth Circuit upheld the district court's previous holding that a 2021 federal agency rule implementing the NSA was inconsistent with the statute in two respects. First, while the rule excluded contracted rates of $0 (so-called "ghost rates") from the QPA calculation, it permitted insurers to include nonzero unnegotiated placeholder rates, including rates as low as $1. The court found no statutory basis for treating $0 and $1 unnegotiated rates differently. Second, the rule permitted insurers to exclude bonus and incentive payments from the calculation, which the court found inconsistent with the statute's "total maximum payment" standard. The court separately upheld the exclusion of one-off single-case agreements from the QPA calculation.

The court's opinion states that certified IDR entities selected a payment amount higher than the insurer-calculated QPA in approximately 85 percent of decided cases. (See also CMS' Independent Dispute Resolution Reports).

Potential Effects

We cannot predict when the relevant agencies will promulgate new rules and guidance in accordance with the court's ruling, or the content of such implementing rules. Following the ruling, once new regulations have been promulgated, insurers will have to recalculate QPAs to exclude ghost rates and include bonus and incentive payments. In the meantime, current enforcement relief permits insurers to continue using prior QPA methodologies for items and services furnished before October 1, 2026, subject to possible extension. The ultimate scope of the required changes will depend on the rules implemented by the relevant federal agencies, which have not been issued as of this release, and on the outcome of any further appeal.

The ruling invalidated the current agency rules and guidance but did not address several implementation questions that will ultimately have to be addressed in future agency rules and guidance, including: (1) whether a service must be provided more than once before its rate may be counted in the QPA; and (2) the mechanics of attributing bonus, incentive, and other non-fee-for-service payments to individual services.

Case: Texas Medical Association v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, No. 23-40605 (5th Cir. Aug. 11, 2026) (en banc).

About Nutex Health Inc.

Headquartered in Houston, Texas and founded in 2011, Nutex Health Inc. (NASDAQ: NUTX) is a healthcare management and operations company with three divisions: a Hospital Division, Population Health Management Division, and Real Estate Division. The Hospital Division owns, develops, and operates innovative health care models, including micro-hospitals, specialty hospitals, and hospital outpatient departments. This division owns and operates 28 facilities in 12 states. The Population Health Management division owns and operates provider networks such as Independent Physician Associations. Through our Management Services Organization, we provide management, administrative and other support services to our affiliated hospitals and physician groups. The real estate division comprises of real estate entities along with activity related to the development and construction of hospital facilities. The real estate entities own the land and hospital buildings which are leased to our hospital entities.

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements and information included in this press release constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. When used in this press release, the words or phrases "will," "will likely result," "expected to," "will continue," "anticipated," "estimate," "projected," "intend," "goal," or similar expressions are intended to identify "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements are subject to certain risks, known and unknown, and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the control of the Company. Such uncertainties and risks include, but are not limited to, regulatory and litigation uncertainty under the No Surprises Act, lawsuits filed by health insurance providers against our third party provider in the arbitration process, sales of a substantial amount of our Common Stock by our stockholders, our obligation to issue additional shares of our common stock to former doctor owners of under construction hospitals, manipulative short seller reports, the impact of litigation and disputes, our ability to successfully execute our growth strategy, economic conditions, dependence on management, lack of capital, the effects of rapid growth upon the Company and the ability of management to effectively respond to the growth and demand for products and services of the Company, newly developing technologies, the Company's ability to compete, conflicts of interest in related party transactions, regulatory matters, protection of technology, lack of industry standards, the effects of competition and the ability of the Company to obtain future financing. An extensive list of factors that can affect future results are discussed in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025 and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and the six months ended June 30, 2026, under the heading "Risk Factors" in Part II, Item IA thereof, and the risk factors and other cautionary statements contained in our other documents filed from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Such factors could materially adversely affect the Company's financial performance and could cause the Company's actual results for future periods to differ materially from any opinions or statements expressed within this press release.

 

Cision View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fifth-circuit-rejects-ghost-rates-in-federal-qpa-calculations-under-the-no-surprises-act-302858877.html

SOURCE Nutex Health, Inc.

FAQ

What did the Fifth Circuit decide about QPA calculations affecting Nutex Health (NUTX) in August 2026?

The Fifth Circuit invalidated parts of federal QPA rules that allowed ghost rates and excluded bonuses and incentives. According to Nutex Health, these rules had depressed out‑of‑network payments, often forcing providers into the Independent Dispute Resolution process to obtain median in‑network rates.

How do ghost rates affect Nutex Health’s QPA payments under the No Surprises Act (NUTX)?

Ghost rates are non‑negotiated placeholder amounts, sometimes as low as $1, previously included in QPA calculations. According to Nutex Health, their inclusion artificially lowered QPAs and payments, increasing financial pressure and dispute frequency for providers using the No Surprises Act framework.

Are patient protections under the No Surprises Act impacted by the Fifth Circuit ruling mentioned by Nutex Health (NUTX)?

Patient protections are unchanged. According to Nutex Health, patients receiving out‑of‑network emergency care, or care at in‑network facilities, still owe only normal in‑network cost‑sharing and cannot be balance‑billed, regardless of ongoing disputes between insurers and providers over payment amounts.

What does the Fifth Circuit QPA decision mean for Nutex Health’s use of Independent Dispute Resolution (NUTX)?

The ruling targets how QPAs are calculated, not the IDR process itself. According to Nutex Health, IDR entities chose amounts above insurer QPAs in about 85% of decided cases, suggesting recalculated QPAs could better reflect fair median in‑network payment benchmarks over time.

When will new QPA regulations take effect for Nutex Health (NUTX) after the Fifth Circuit decision?

The timing is unclear. According to Nutex Health, agencies have not yet issued replacement rules, and current enforcement relief allows use of prior QPA methodologies for items and services furnished before October 1, 2026, subject to potential extension or further regulatory action.

How might including bonuses and incentives in QPA calculations affect Nutex Health’s reimbursements (NUTX)?

The court held that bonuses and incentives must count toward the QPA’s total maximum payment standard. According to Nutex Health, recalculating QPAs to include these amounts could change benchmark figures used in future payment disputes, though the precise financial impact remains uncertain.

Does the Fifth Circuit ruling in Texas Medical Association v. HHS apply to all Nutex Health facilities (NUTX)?

The ruling addresses federal QPA calculation rules within the Fifth Circuit’s jurisdiction, not facility‑specific contracts. According to Nutex Health, insurers will eventually need to recalculate QPAs under new federal guidance, which would influence out‑of‑network payment benchmarks affecting its micro hospitals and networks.