On January 8, 2025, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey signed into law House Bill 5159 (the “Bill”). The Bill grants the state new regulatory powers to oversee and review health care transactions involving private equity firms, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”), and management services organizations (“MSOs”). The Bill is the tenth law enacted in recent years to scrutinize health care transactions, and its enactment in Massachusetts highlights the continued expansion of state oversight of health care transactions.

Key Provisions

History and Regulatory Backdrop

History of Regulation of Health Care Facilities

Although the Bill is among the most comprehensive and far‑reaching in the nation, it is not without precedent. As described by Proskauer in a number of recent alerts, publications, and presentations (including for the American Health Law Association and the New York State Bar Association), elected officials in a number of states have reacted to the decade‑old surge in investment in the health care sector with measures that are intended to scrutinize and increase transparency over such transactions.

In addition, transaction review laws build upon existing, and sometimes controversial, regulatory review mechanisms that impact the health care industry, particularly “Certificate of Need” (“CON”) laws. By way of background, and as a result of now‑defunct federal requirements, states in the 1970s adopted CON laws, a form of economic planning intended to avoid over‑supply.[8] State CON laws, many of which remain in effect,[9] regulate health care facilities (e.g., hospitals and ASCs) and typically impose approval or reporting requirements over certain transactions, such as facility renovations, expansions or mergers, or the purchase of complex medical equipment (e.g., CT or MRI).

Despite this backdrop of substantial regulation affecting health care facilities, many states have historically had limited to no regulatory review authority over transactions affected physicians and physician practices. In light of existing regulatory oversight affecting facilities, state legislators may view health care transaction laws as incremental expansions over state regulatory powers. In contrast, investors and their stakeholders are likely to view these laws as material expansions, given that there was historically limited regulatory oversight for these transactions.

The Impact of the Steward Health Care Bankruptcy

The Bill should be viewed as a reaction by Massachusetts elected officials to the bankruptcy of Steward Health Care. The bankruptcy, which was widely reported on and resulted in a number of federal and state‑level legislative hearings, impacted Massachusetts residents, in particular, and resulted in the Massachusetts Department of Public Health establishing a call center dedicated to answering public questions regarding the bankruptcy.

As summarized by the Massachusetts Senate in the first sentence of a press release concerning the Bill, the “Bill helps close gaps that caused the Steward Health Care collapse.”[10]

Expanded Definition of Material Change Transactions

Under existing Massachusetts law, health care providers and organizations with annual net patient service revenue exceeding $25 million are required to submit a Material Change Notice (“MCN”) to HPC, CHIA, and the Office of the Attorney General at least 60 days prior to a proposed material change.

The Bill broadens the scope of what constitutes a material change that requires the submission of an MCN to include the following:[11]

Of note, some of new categories, such as “significant expansion” in “capacity”, are ambiguous and do not adopt firm reporting threshold or parameters, which we expect are likely to be addressed via further rule‑making or guidance.

Implications for Private Equity Investors and REITs

The Bill represents a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for private equity investors and REITs in Massachusetts, and the Bill makes Massachusetts an outlier among the states with respect to the obligations and duties imposed upon investors and REITs.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Bill’s requirements represent a significant evolution, the product of ongoing legislative compromise. When introduced in the Massachusetts Senate as Senate Bill 2871 in 2024, the Bill’s precursor included additional statutory restrictions related to the corporate practice of medicine and “Friendly PC” model, maximum debt‑to‑EBITDA requirements for transactions involving providers or provider organizations, and bond requirements for private equity investors.

Stakeholders are advised to closely monitor further guidance and regulations that may be issued by Massachusetts authorities, and should continue to follow Proskauer’s Health Care Law Brief for continuing developments in this space.

Relevant Definitions


[1] Bill, Section 24.

[2] Bill, Section 42.

[3] Bill, Section 43.

[4] Bill, Section 24.

[5] Bill, Section 29.

[6] Bill, Section 49.

[7] Bill, Section 64

[8] See National Health Planning and Resources Development Act of 1974 (P.L. 93‑641).

[9] See, e.g., National Conference of State Legislatures, Certificate of Need State Laws, available at: https://www.ncsl.org/health/certificate‑of‑need‑state‑laws.

[10] Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Senate Press Room, Legislature Passes Major Health Care Oversight Legislation, Regulates Private Equity (Dec. 30, 2024), available at: https://malegislature.gov/PressRoom/Detail?pressReleaseId=164.

[11] See Bill, Section 24.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *