On September 11, 2025, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (the OIG) issued a favorable advisory opinion (AO 25-10 or the Opinion) regarding an arrangement between a healthcare services company (the Company) and a charitable foundation (the Foundation), whereby the Company makes financial contributions to the Foundation, which then provides grants to families of children receiving a particular type of therapy (the Arrangement). Pursuant to AO 25-10, the OIG will not impose sanctions with respect to the Arrangement, despite the Arrangement potentially generating prohibited remuneration under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (the AKS) and implicating the civil monetary penalty provision prohibiting inducements to beneficiaries (the Beneficiary Inducements CMP).

In today’s digital marketplace, direct sellers rely heavily on electronic agreements to govern their relationships with customers, vendors, and partners. But whether these electronic agreements are enforceable depends, at least in part, on how your policies and other terms are presented to users and the way assent is obtained. Courts scrutinize these issues closely, emphasizing that even minor design choices can make the difference between a binding electronic agreement and an unenforceable set of terms.

The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) has initiated a public consultation process in preparation for the upcoming joint review of the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), scheduled for July 1, 2026. This process is mandated by Article 34.7 of the USMCA and section 611 of the USMCA Implementation Act, which require a comprehensive evaluation of the agreement’s operation and a determination by each party on whether to extend the agreement for an additional 16-year term.