The FAQs on Administrative Simplification http://aspe.hhs.gov/admnsimp/faqtx.htm#effectstatelaw
states that the federal regulations on transactions supercede any State law that is contrary to them but allows for an exception process for conflicting State laws. Perhaps somebody can expand upon this issue for you.
Paul Weber
916-449-6970
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tolin, Gary T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 11:37:38 -0400
To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: state mandates versus HIPAA-required fields on the 834
An issue has been raised due to a NY provision that health plans need to have the effective from and through dates captured for members of small employer groups. This is for prior insurance coverage.
The 834 IG does not require this data to be captured. I would say that the HIPAA rule trumps whatever the states mandate.
However, for any transaction, would a state statute that requires data outside of the HIPAA-designated fields overrule the federal mandate?
Thank you in advance for your assistance!
Regards,
**********************************************************************
To be removed from this list, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please note that it may take up to 72 hours to process your request.
======================================================
The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The
discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual
participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of
Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post
your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at
http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/.
Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is
specifically prohibited. --
_______________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
