HB 372 obligates licensed Alaska health care providers and entities that receive referrals to submit one-time reports about financial relationships tied to patient referrals and the amounts billed for those referred services during fiscal year 2026. The bill covers a broad set of services—from clinical labs and imaging to durable medical equipment and inpatient hospital care—and requires submission on commissioner-provided forms by September 1, 2026.
The bill then requires the Department of Health to compile the submitted data into a legislative report that compares referral frequency and billed amounts when a referral recipient is financially linked to the referrer (including immediate family ties) versus when no such relationship exists. The statute shields personally identifying information from public disclosure but creates new compliance, data-collection, and analysis tasks for providers and the department.
At a Glance
What It Does
HB 372 requires three groups to file data: (1) referring licensed providers must disclose financial relationships with entities they refer to and submit counts of referrals for FY2026; (2) providers of the listed services must report amounts billed in FY2026 for patients referred by providers with and without financial ties; and (3) the commissioner must produce a comparative report to the legislature using those submissions.
Who It Affects
Directly affected parties include licensed referring clinicians in Alaska, suppliers and facility-based providers that receive referrals for the enumerated services, and the Alaska Department of Health, which must collect, analyze, and report the data. Payers and health system compliance teams will also see downstream effects when interpreting the report.
Why It Matters
This creates a state-level dataset intended to reveal whether financial ties influence referral patterns or spending. For compliance officers and health system managers, it signals an increased expectation of transparency and may trigger internal audits, contract reviews, and changes to referral practices.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
HB 372 sets a one-time reporting exercise focused on referrals made during fiscal year 2026. The law directs the commissioner of health to supply forms and requires every licensed health care provider who makes referrals for selected services to disclose any financial relationship they have with the recipient of those referrals.
If the financial relationship involves an immediate family member of the referrer, the referrer must identify that family member by name and provide the referrer's name and license number on the form. Separately, those entities that provide the listed services must report how much they billed in FY2026 for patients who were referred by providers who did have a financial relationship with them and for patients who were referred by providers who did not.
The covered services are explicitly enumerated and span diagnostic, therapeutic, equipment, home-based, outpatient prescription, and hospital services. All reporting must be submitted on commissioner-provided forms by September 1, 2026.
The statute also allows the commissioner to request supplemental details if necessary to complete the analysis, and it expressly treats any personally identifying information collected under the statute as confidential and exempt from public-record disclosure statutes.After collecting the submissions, the department must prepare an analytical report for the legislature that, for FY2026, lists referral counts and billed amounts by referring provider, separating referrals to entities with which the referrer (or an immediate family member) has a financial relationship from referrals to entities with no financial relationship. The department must deliver that report to the legislature before the First Regular Session of the Thirty-Fifth Alaska State Legislature begins.
The law does not create an ongoing, recurring reporting cycle beyond this exercise, nor does it prescribe enforcement penalties in the text for noncompliance; it focuses on data collection and legislative reporting.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Reports must cover referrals and amounts billed during fiscal year 2026 and be submitted on forms the commissioner provides by September 1, 2026.
Referring providers must disclose any financial relationships with referral recipients and must identify immediate family members with whom they have relationships, including names and the referrer’s license number.
Service providers must split FY2026 billed amounts for referred patients into two buckets: billed amounts for referrals where the referrer (or referrer’s immediate family member) has a financial relationship, and billed amounts for referrals where no financial relationship exists.
The commissioner may request additional information from reporting parties to complete the analysis, and all personally identifying information collected under the statute is confidential and exempt from AS 40.25.110–40.25.140 public-record disclosure.
Using the submitted data, the commissioner must produce a report that enumerates referral counts and billed amounts per referring provider—separating related-party referrals from unrelated referrals—and deliver it to the legislature before the First Regular Session of the Thirty-Fifth Legislature.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Referring providers must disclose financial ties
This subsection obligates every licensed health care provider who makes referrals for the listed services to report any financial relationship they have with the entity they refer to; it also requires disclosure when the financial relationship is with an immediate family member of the referrer. Practically, this forces clinicians to inventory ownership, compensation, or other financial arrangements tied to referral destinations and to place that information on a standard form supplied by the department.
Referrers must report referral volumes and destinations for FY2026
Here the bill requires referring providers to report the number of referrals they made during fiscal year 2026 for each covered service and to name the entity receiving those referrals. That turns qualitative conflict-of-interest assertions into concrete counts linked to specific recipients, which is the raw material the commissioner will use to compare patterns across providers and relationships.
Providers receiving referrals must report billed amounts by relationship status
This provision forces suppliers, labs, imaging centers, pharmacies, hospitals, and others on the list to report how much they billed in FY2026 for patients referred by providers who have financial ties to them and for patients referred by providers who do not. The split-bucket approach is central: it lets the department compute spending differentials tied to referral-source relationships rather than relying on anecdote.
Department authority for follow-up and confidentiality protections
The commissioner may require additional supporting information to finish the report, which is an open-ended authority that could include claims-level data or contractual documentation. At the same time, the statute expressly treats any personally identifying information collected under the law as confidential and not subject to Alaska’s public-record statutes, a protection that narrows public access but leaves data available for internal analysis and legislative review.
Enumerated service categories and the commissioner’s legislative report
The bill lists ten service categories—clinical labs; PT/OT/speech outpatient; radiology/diagnostic imaging; radiation therapy; durable medical equipment; parenteral/enteral supplies; prosthetics/orthotics; home health; outpatient prescription drugs; and inpatient/outpatient hospital services. Using the submitted returns, Section 2 directs the commissioner to produce a report for FY2026 that tabulates referral counts and billed amounts by referring provider and relationship status, and to deliver that report to the legislature before the first day of the next regular session.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- State policymakers and legislative staff — gain a structured dataset to identify potential patterns of referrals tied to financial interests, enabling evidence-based oversight and possible future policy options.
- Payers and purchasers (Medicaid, insurers, large employers) — receive empirical information they can use to target audits, adjust network arrangements, or negotiate payment and utilization controls if the report reveals anomalous patterns.
- Researchers and health services analysts — obtain a rare, jurisdiction-level linkage between referral origin, relationship status, and billed amounts that can support studies on utilization, cost drivers, and market behavior.
Who Bears the Cost
- Referring clinicians and their compliance teams — must collect, verify, and file information about private financial relationships and referral counts for FY2026, which creates administrative work and potential legal review costs.
- Small service providers and facilities — must parse billing records to separate amounts billed for referred patients by relationship status, which could require claims-system changes, staff time, or vendor support to produce the requested totals.
- Alaska Department of Health — must stand up intake processes, validate heterogeneous submissions, run comparative analyses, and prepare the legislative report, all within existing resources unless the legislature supplies additional funding.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill pits two legitimate goals: exposing financial ties that could influence referrals and protecting providers’ and patients’ privacy and operational stability. Pushing for transparency by collecting detailed, provider-level referral and billing data improves the legislature’s ability to detect possible conflicts of interest, but it also creates reporting complexity, privacy risks, and incentives for providers to alter referral behavior—potentially reducing care coordination—without guaranteeing that the data will be clean or actionable.
Implementation raises practical questions about data quality, definitional clarity, and privacy-protection mechanics. The statute relies on self-reporting of financial relationships and referral counts; absent strict definitions or audit authority, submissions may be inconsistent or incomplete.
The commissioner’s authority to request additional information provides a backstop, but it also introduces potential variability in enforcement and burden across providers. Likewise, requiring providers to split billed amounts into related- and unrelated-referral categories presumes payers and suppliers can identify referred patients and map them to referrers reliably — a nontrivial exercise for mixed-billing environments or bundled hospital claims.
The confidentiality carve-out for personally identifying information limits public scrutiny but also raises questions about internal access controls, aggregation thresholds, and whether deidentified summaries will be granular enough for useful oversight. Finally, although the bill is a one-time FY2026 exercise, the act may prompt behavior changes (such as reduced referral partnerships or more formal contracting) that affect patient access; regulators and stakeholders will need clear guidance on definitions, acceptable formats, and the legal scope of ‘‘financial relationship’’ to avoid inconsistent compliance and unanticipated disruption to care pathways.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.