UnitedHealth CEO Andrew Witty testifies before the Senate Finance Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 1, 2024.
Kent Nishimura | Getty Images
Following the massive cyberattack on UnitedHealth Group’s Change Healthcare unit last year, the company launched a temporary funding assistance program to help medical practices with their short-term cash flow needs, offering no-interest loans with no added fees.
A little over a year later, UnitedHealth is aggressively going after borrowers, demanding they “immediately repay” their outstanding balances, according to documents viewed by CNBC and providers who received funding. Some groups have been asked to repay hundreds of thousands of dollars in a matter of days.
Optum, UnitedHealth’s financial, pharmacy and care services arm, is telling borrowers that it reserves the right to “begin offsetting claims payable” to the practices, meaning the company will withhold separate funds until it recoups the loan.
It’s a significant change in posture for the company, which suffered a cyberattack in February 2024 that compromised data from around 190 million Americans, the largest reported health-care breach in U.S. history. The ensuing disruption caused severe fallout across the health-care system, leaving many providers temporarily unable to get paid for their services. Some dipped into their personal savings to keep their practices afloat.
During a Senate hearing about the attack in May, UnitedHealth CEO Andrew Witty said providers would only be required to repay the loans when “they, not me, but they confirm that their cash flow is normalized.”
Several doctors who took advantage of the financing told CNBC that they can’t meet the company’s new demands. Dr. Christine Meyer, an internist who started a practice in Exton, Pennsylvania, received a letter from Optum earlier this month telling her to immediately submit her organization’s payment.
“We are not in any position to start repaying this loan,” Meyer, who started her practice about 20 years ago, told CNBC. She has been a vocal critic of UnitedHealth following the breach.
“I’m just looking at all my legal options at this point,” Meyer said. “But repaying them $750,000 in five days is obviously not going to happen.”
UnitedHealth didn’t comment on specific cases, but a spokesperson for Change Healthcare confirmed that the company has started recouping the loans.
“Now, more than one year post the event and with services restored, we have begun the process of recouping the interest-free funding we provided to providers,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
The company said the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services took the same approach last year “under its own cyber-attack lending program.” HHS launched a separate funding assistance program through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services last March. CMS said it would automatically recoup payments from Medicare claims, and providers could accrue interest, according to a release.
“We continue to work with providers on repayment and other options, and continue to reach out to those providers that have not been responsive to previous calls or email requests for more information,” the Change Healthcare spokesperson said.
Providers were told that UnitedHealth reserved the right to withhold future payments when they signed up for the funding assistance program, the company added. CNBC independently reviewed a copy of a loan agreement for the program and confirmed this statement.
Change Healthcare, which offers payment and revenue cycle management tools, was acquired by Optum in 2022.
After discovering the breach last year, UnitedHealth said it isolated and disconnected the impacted systems. The company paid out more than $9 billion to providers in 2024, and more than $4.5 billion has already been repaid, according to the company’s fourth-quarter earnings report in January. UnitedHealth said providers would receive an invoice once standard payment operations resumed, and that they would be subject to a repayment period of 45 business days.
“Change Healthcare will notify the recipient that the funding amount is due after claims processing or payment processing services have resumed and payments impacted during the service disruption period are processed,” the website says.
Dwindling deposits, lost revenue
While the vast majority of Change Healthcare’s services have been restored over the course of the last year, three products are still listed as “partial service available,” according to UnitedHealth’s cyberattack response website.
And doctors are still reeling.
Meyer said that when the breach took place, she watched her practice’s daily deposits shrivel from the range of $60,000 to $80,000 to about $150 “overnight.” She applied for Optum’s temporary funding assistance program, and after some difficulty and back and forth with the company, she ultimately received a total of $756,900 in financial assistance.
Former Senator Bob Casey Jr., D-Pa., shared Meyer’s story during the congressional hearing in May. He asked Witty about the company’s approach to the repayment process.
“I’d like to absolutely confirm to you and Dr. Meyer that we have no intention of asking for loan repayment until after she determines that her business is back to normal,” Witty told lawmakers. “Even then, we would not look for repayment until 45 business days – 60 calendar days – after that and there would be no interest and no fee associated with that loan.”
“So it would be a determination she makes?” Casey asked.
“That’s absolutely right,” Witty said.
Meyer said that’s not what happened.
UnitedHealth Group Inc. headquarters stands in Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.
Mike Bradley | Bloomberg | Getty Images
She received a notice from Optum on Jan. 24, which was viewed by CNBC, that requested repayment since “the service disruption has ended for most clients.” Meyer said she called and told the company she was “not in any position to pay.”
Meyer claims that her practice lost more than $1 million in revenue due to the Change Healthcare cyberattack. She told CNBC the figure was based on a forensic financial analysis her practice carried out by comparing its charges against payments over recent years. The $1.2 million figure accounts for losses across all its insurers, not just UnitedHealthcare, Meyer said.
On April 1, Meyer received another notice requesting immediate repayment within five business days. The letter was addressed to Meyer. But the name of the practice on the letter, Insight Counseling, as well as the total amount due, $925,200, were incorrect.
Meyer said she called Optum again and was told the company made a mistake, but that she had five days to repay her actual total of $750,000. At that point, the company would start withholding her UnitedHealthcare payments, which she described as a “shakedown.”
Meyer said her practice typically receives annual claims payments of about $150,000 to $200,000 from UnitedHealthcare.
“I guess I’ll just let them take those payments back for the next three years until they get their money back,” she told CNBC.
In a post on LinkedIn on Thursday, Meyer wrote that she and her team “made a plan to leave the least amount of money in the account set up to receive payments from UnitedHealthcare. If it isn’t there, they can’t get it.”
‘Very frustrating experience’
Dr. Purvi Parikh, an allergist and immunologist with a private practice in New York, shared a similar story.
Parikh’s practice received about $440,000 in funding assistance after the breach. She said she started getting repayment notices late last year, and that Optum was threatening to offset claims payable to the practice.
“We were already hit very hard by the Change Healthcare hack,” Parikh said in an interview. “Now on top of that, they’re asking for all of this money back or they’re going to hold future payments ransom. It’s just been a very frustrating experience dealing with Optum.”
Parikh’s practice requested a one-month extension on its final payment of $101,650 in January to try and keep UnitedHealth from withholding other payments. In the email request, Parikh’s colleague wrote that “it has been quite difficult to recover financially.”
Optum granted Parikh’s practice the extension.
“People don’t just have that amount of money just sitting around,” Parikh said. “We’ve paid everything back, but it wasn’t without hardship.”
A physician who runs a pediatric practice in New Jersey said UnitedHealth has already started withholding payments from the organization. The practice received more than $500,000 in funding assistance following the Change Healthcare breach.
The doctor, who asked not to be named due to the sensitive nature of the situation, said the practice began receiving phone calls and emails from Optum requesting repayment beginning late last year. The group indicated that it didn’t have the money, but would set up a payment plan and had begun the process.
But the doctor said its billing department noticed that UnitedHealth had already started holding back claims payments. In its explanation of benefits, which details what an insurer will cover, the doctor said the company has a line that reads, “UnitedHealthcare is withholding payment for Optum.”
Every weekday, the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer releases the Homestretch — an actionable afternoon update, just in time for the last hour of trading on Wall Street. Markets: Stocks continued their recent declines Tuesday as megacap tech lagged on worries about valuations within the artificial intelligence trade. The S & P 500 was on track for its worst losing streak since August as it closed in on its fourth consecutive session of losses. Club stocks Amazon and Microsoft weighed on the market, shedding 4% and 2.7%, respectively, in the afternoon. Club holding Nvidia ‘s 1.5% drop didn’t help sentiment either, going into its highly anticipated earnings report Wednesday evening. The Club also had a busy day of trades. We bought more Home Depot on its post-earnings decline , and sold half of our Disney stake following a disappointing quarter last week. Later in the session, we booked some big profits in Eli Lilly , while adding to our Nike position. The Club also initiated a position in Procter & Gamble , a consumer powerhouse behind household brands like Tide, Crest, and Gillette. Done deal : Salesforce closed its $8.3 billion acquisition of AI-powered data management company Informatica ahead of schedule. The companies had been targeting early next year for completion. “The market didn’t really care for this deal when it was announced in May,” Jeff Marks, director of portfolio analysis for the Club, said Tuesday afternoon, recalling Salesforce shares sinking on reports of the deal and the subsequent announcement a few days later. Marks added that the early completion of the purchase is a “good sign of confidence in the integration that Salesforce expects the deal to be accretive to non-GAAP operating margin and non-GAAP earnings per share one year faster than originally believed.” Despite these positive developments, Marks said Salesforce is still a “show me” story. Salesforce has yet to convince investors that AI doesn’t threaten the software giant’s core business, which operates using a seat-based model. The stock lost more than 1.5% in Tuesday’s trading. Big win: Meta Platforms got a big win Tuesday afternoon in an important antitrust case against the Federal Trade Commission. A federal judge ruled that the FTC did not prove its claims that Meta holds a monopoly in social networking or that the company should not have been allowed to acquire Instagram and WhatsApp back in 2012 and 2014, respectively. The agency, which wanted those two units to be divested, argued that there are no major apps like Facebook and Instagram. The judge, however, said that there are plenty of competitors, citing TikTok and YouTube, and contended that the social media landscape has changed radically since those Meta acquisitions were made over a decade ago. Shares of Club name Meta turned positive late Tuesday. The favorable Meta ruling came 10 weeks after Alphabet’s Google avoided the harshest penalties in the antitrust case it lost last year. Good news: iPhone sales in China surged in October, taking Apple’s dominance in the country’s smartphone market to one in every four phones sold, according to the latest data from Counterpoint Research . Apple last achieved this milestone in 2022. Overall, sales for Apple’s flagship device in China jumped 37% last month from the year prior. Analysts at Counterpoint pointed to solid demand for the iPhone 17, in particular, for the market share gains. All three iPhone 17 variants have outperformed iPhone 16 models in sales, according to Counterpoint, posting mid-to-high double-digit percentage growth from year-earlier levels. The base model of the iPhone 17 continued to grow at the fastest rate. Apple shares were up slightly on Tuesday. Jim Cramer has pounded the table on the new iPhones since the September launch. He previously described its debut as “gigantic” and argued that Apple’s newest devices are “more of a bargain” than past versions. The Club maintains its long-held “own it, don’t trade it” thesis on Apple stock. Up next: Club holding TJX will report quarterly earnings Wednesday morning, along with other retailers like Target and Lowe’s . Then, Nvidia and Palo Alto Networks , both Club names, will release their results after Wednesday’s market close. Investors will also get the minutes from the October Fed meeting at 2 p.m. ET on Wednesday. (See here for a full list of the stocks in Jim Cramer’s Charitable Trust.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust’s portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg appears at the Meta Connect event in Menlo Park, California, on Sept. 25, 2024.
David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Meta won its high-profile antitrust case against the Federal Trade Commission, which had accused the company of holding a monopoly in social networking.
In a memorandum opinion released Tuesday, Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.,said the FTC failed to prove its argument. The case, initially filed by the FTC five years ago, centered on Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.
“Whether or not Meta enjoyed monopoly power in the past, though, the agency must show that it continues to hold such power now,” Boasbergsaid in the filing. “The Court’s verdict today determines that the FTC has not done so. A judgment so stating shall issue this day.”
Boasberg dismissed the case in 2021, saying the agency didn’t have enough evidence to prove “Facebook holds market power.” In August of that year, the FTC filed an amended complaint with more details about the company’s user numbers and metrics relative to competitors like Snapchat, the now-defunct Google+ social network and Myspace.
After reviewing the amendments, Boasberg in 2022 ruled that the case could proceed, saying the FTC had presented more details than before.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former operating chief Sheryl Sandberg, Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom and other current and former Meta executives all testified in the trial, which began in April.
Meta shares were little changed on Tuesday. The stock is up about 2% for the year, badly underperforming broader indexes and most of its megacap tech peers.
“The Court’s decision today recognizes that Meta faces fierce competition,” the company said in a statement. “Our products are beneficial for people and businesses and exemplify American innovation and economic growth. We look forward to continuing to partner with the Administration and to invest in America.”
The FTC didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
The ruling comes a little over two months after Googleavoided the harshest possible penalty from an antitrust case it lost last year. While Google was found to hold an illegal monopoly in its core market of internet search, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta decided the company would not be forced to sell its Chrome browser, bucking the Department of Justice’s request. Google was, however, ordered to loosen its hold on search data.
In the Meta case, the FTC claimed the company shouldn’t have been allowed to buy Instagram for $1 billion in 2012 and WhatsApp for $19 billion in 2014, and the agency called for those units to be divested. The commission also alleged that there were no major alternatives for apps like Facebook and Instagram that people use to communicate with friends and family in a online, social space.
However, a major challenge for the FTC, according to the judge, was in proving that Meta is breaking antitrust law today, not years ago when the primary use of social networks was very different and based on sharing other kinds of content.
“To win the permanent injunction that it seeks here, the FTC must prove a current or imminent legal violation,” he wrote.
Boasberg ultimately sided with Meta’s argument that the technology industry has evolved since the early days of Facebook, and the company now faces a wide variety of competitors like TikTok.
“While each of Meta’s empirical showings can be quibbled with, they all tell a consistent story: people treat TikTok and YouTube as substitutes for Facebook and Instagram, and the amount of competitive overlap is economically important,” Boasberg wrote. “Against that unmistakable pattern, the FTC offers no empirical evidence of substitution whatsoever.”
Big changes in social
Much of Judge Boasberg’s conclusion was built on the transformation that’s taken place in the social media market in recent years and Meta’s changing position within it. User trends have moved heavily in the direction of video, where TikTok and YouTube have massive user bases and huge network effects.
“The most-used part of Meta’s apps is thus indistinguishable from the offerings on TikTok and YouTube,” Boasberg wrote.
Boasberg explained that there was enough evidence to show “that consumers are reallocating massive amounts of time from Meta’s apps” to those services and others, which has “forced Meta to invest gobs of cash to keep up.”
“Meta is not a monopolist insulated from competition,” he wrote. “The Court finds the evidence favoring Meta on this issue both credible and convincing.”
Boasberg also cited various documents and testimony from “industry insiders” that show how other tech companies like TikTok and YouTube viewed Meta as serious competition.
“TikTok and YouTube tracked Meta’s products as competitive threats,” Boasberg wrote.
A Waymo autonomous self-driving Jaguar taxi drives along a street on March 14, 2024 in Los Angeles, California.
Mario Tama | Getty Images
Waymo on Tuesday said it will bring its robotaxi service to new cities in Texas and Florida in 2026.
The Alphabet-owned company said it plans to start operating its vehicles with no human driver assistants in Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Miami and Orlando in the coming weeks before opening service in those markets to the public next year, the company said in a blog.
“Waymo has entered a new phase of commercial scale, doubling the number of cities we operate without a human specialist in the car,” Waymo Chief Product Officer Saswat Panigrahi said in an emailed statement Tuesday.
Waymo had previously announced plans to launch its robotaxi service in Dallas and Miami in 2026, but Tuesday was the first time the company said it planned to launch service next year in the other cities. Waymo will first offer fully autonomous trips to its employees in those markets, a spokesperson said.
The company has been gearing up to expand its paid robotaxis service in 2026. The company previously announced plans to expand to Detroit, Las Vegas, Nashville, San Diego, Washington, D.C., and London in 2026.
Last week, Waymo began offering freeway routes in the San Francisco, Phoenix and Los Angeles markets. The Google sister company will gradually extend freeway trips to more riders and locations over time.
Already, Waymo operates its paid robotaxi service in Austin, San Francisco, Phoenix, Atlanta and Los Angeles. The company has provided more than 10 million paid rides since first launching in 2020, the company said in May.
Waymo’s Florida and Texas expansion announcement comes the same day that Amazon-owned Zoox began allowing select San Francisco users to hail its driverless vehicles. San Francisco is the second market where Zoox now offers a free service, after its launch in Las Vegas in September. Zoox has deployed a fleet of 50 robotaxis between San Francisco and Las Vegas, the company told CNBC in September.