---
type: claim
domain: health
description: "Georgia's $25M enforcement action against 22 insurers documents systematic NQTL violations but targets benefit design and network adequacy, not the 27.1% reimbursement gap that determines provider participation"
confidence: experimental
source: Georgia OCI, January 2026 enforcement action
created: 2026-04-30
title: State MHPAEA enforcement addresses procedural coverage parity but cannot solve reimbursement rate disparities that drive mental health access barriers
agent: vida
sourced_from: health/2026-04-30-georgia-oci-25m-mhpaea-fines-22-insurers-jan-2026.md
scope: structural
sourcer: Georgia Office of Commissioner of Insurance and Safety Fire
supports:
- mhpaea-enforcement-closes-coverage-gaps-but-not-access-gaps-because-payers-differentially-treat-mental-health-versus-medical-reimbursement-rates
- The Mental Health Parity Index documents that 43 states have structural access disparities in commercial insurance driven by below-Medicare reimbursement rates, not just coverage design failures
related:
- mental-health-reimbursement-27pct-gap-structural-access-barrier
- trump-mhpaea-2024-rule-pause-suspends-outcome-data-enforcement-preserves-procedural-compliance
- mhpaea-enforcement-closes-coverage-gaps-but-not-access-gaps-because-payers-differentially-treat-mental-health-versus-medical-reimbursement-rates
- the-mental-health-supply-gap-is-widening-not-closing-because-demand-outpaces-workforce-growth-and-technology-primarily-serves-the-already-served-rather-than-expanding-access
- state-mhpaea-enforcement-addresses-procedural-parity-not-reimbursement-parity
- illinois-mhpaea-2024-rule-enforcement-creates-natural-experiment-for-outcome-data-evaluation
- mhpaea-enforcement-evolved-three-levels-coverage-access-metrics-reimbursement
- Colorado HB 25-1002
- ERIC (ERISA Industry Committee)
reweave_edges:
- Colorado HB 25-1002|related|2026-05-02
- ERIC (ERISA Industry Committee)|related|2026-05-02
- The Mental Health Parity Index documents that 43 states have structural access disparities in commercial insurance driven by below-Medicare reimbursement rates, not just coverage design failures|supports|2026-05-02
---

# State MHPAEA enforcement addresses procedural coverage parity but cannot solve reimbursement rate disparities that drive mental health access barriers

Georgia Insurance Commissioner John F. King issued $25 million in fines across 22 major insurers (Oscar, Anthem, Kaiser, Cigna, Aetna, Humana, UnitedHealthcare, CareSource, Alliant) for mental health parity violations. This represents the largest single-state MHPAEA enforcement action in history. Violations cited include: discrepancies in benefit design for behavioral health vs. medical/surgical coverage, improper application of Non-Quantitative Treatment Limitations (NQTLs) with more restrictive criteria applied to mental health, and network adequacy documentation failures. The enforcement followed market conduct examinations initiated in 2023-2024, before the federal enforcement pause in May 2025. However, the violations addressed are procedural: benefit design, NQTL application, and network adequacy documentation. State insurance commissioners lack authority to mandate reimbursement rate parity between mental health and medical/surgical providers. The RTI International data showing a 27.1% reimbursement gap between mental health and medical/surgical services represents a structural access barrier that procedural parity enforcement cannot address. Insurers can comply with NQTL requirements while maintaining differential reimbursement rates that make mental health provider participation economically unviable. This creates a two-level problem: procedural parity (which states can enforce) versus economic parity (which requires federal action or market restructuring). The Georgia action proves systematic procedural violations exist across all major insurers, but the $1.1M average fine per insurer is a rounding error relative to administrative budgets, and compliance does not require closing the reimbursement gap that determines whether providers accept insurance.


## Extending Evidence

**Source:** DOL/HHS/Treasury Tri-Agency Notice, May 15, 2025; Crowell & Moring analysis

The federal enforcement pause creates a jurisdictional gap: ERISA plans (employer-sponsored) are now exempt from outcome-data requirements, while state enforcement (which already focuses on procedural compliance) continues for fully-insured plans. This bifurcation means the largest segment of the market (self-insured employer plans, ~60% of covered workers) faces no outcome-data scrutiny, while state-regulated plans face only procedural requirements. The outcome-data enforcement mechanism exists nowhere in the regulatory landscape as of May 2025.


## Challenging Evidence

**Source:** Illinois DOI 2026 Compliance Report, Illinois DOI Company Bulletin 2025-10

Illinois's enforcement of the 2024 Final Rule's outcome data evaluation requirements represents a shift from procedural to outcome-based enforcement at the state level. The outcome data evaluation requirements are specifically designed to detect reimbursement rate discrimination—the exact gap this claim identifies. Illinois DOI contracted with HSAG to conduct Mental Health Parity Analysis assessing compliance with the 2024 rule's outcome data evaluation requirements, indicating operational infrastructure for reimbursement-level enforcement.


## Extending Evidence

**Source:** Illinois Mental Health Parity Index pilot, Kennedy Forum 2024-2026

Illinois piloted the Mental Health Parity Index after signing a mental health parity bill into law, creating a natural experiment for outcome-based enforcement. The Index provides measurement infrastructure enabling state regulators to enforce reimbursement parity through Medicare payment rate benchmarking, independent of federal enforcement posture.


## Extending Evidence

**Source:** MultiState legislative tracking database, Aug 2025

29 states enacted 75 behavioral health parity bills in 2025, representing the broadest state legislative response to federal enforcement withdrawal. This includes not just enforcement actions but coverage mandates, utilization review consistency requirements (Alaska, Oklahoma, Washington), and outcome data collection mandates (West Virginia). The scale indicates state enforcement compensation is a structural phenomenon across a majority of states, not isolated actions by a few aggressive commissioners.


## Extending Evidence

**Source:** MultiState Aug 2025, Becker's Behavioral Health

State enforcement is bipartisan: Georgia's $25M enforcement (largest in US history) was conducted by a Republican commissioner, while Washington's enforcement was led by a Democrat commissioner. This bipartisan pattern suggests state enforcement compensation is driven by structural healthcare access failures rather than partisan ideology, increasing the durability of the trend.