Abstract
Private equity has become an increasingly influential force in American healthcare. Hundreds of billions of dollars have flown into healthcare acquisitions over the last decade, and a growing share of physician practices and health services are coming under investor control. This Comment argues that the current regulatory framework has not kept pace with that expansion. Existing federal tools, primarily antitrust and fraud enforcement, leave most transactions unreviewed because many deals fall below reporting thresholds. At the state level, doctrines such as the corporate practice of medicine are unevenly enforced and often avoided through management services’ organization structures. These structures preserve formal physician ownership, but shift practical control and economic incentives. Gaps in regulation matter because private equity’s core model often prioritizes short investment horizons and the use of leverage. That approach, coupled with aggressive value-extraction strategies, can conflict with healthcare’s long-term commitments to patient welfare, stable access, and ethical clinical judgment. After defining private equity and describing its market structure, this Comment traces the evolution of private equity activity in healthcare, surveys the fragmented federal and state regulatory landscape, and evaluates how these rules operate in practice through recent enforcement efforts. It then weighs competing arguments about efficiency and innovation against evidence of higher prices and compromised quality. Finally, it proposes a more robust, balanced regulatory approach that strengthens transparency and oversight without undermining legitimate capital formation or operational improvements.
Recommended Citation
Ryan Scivally, Private Equity in Healthcare: The Case for Stricter Regulations, 20 FIU L. Rev. 1411 (2026), https://doi.org/10.25148/lawrev.20.4.15.
Included in
Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Banking and Finance Law Commons, Business Organizations Law Commons
