PBM audits often reveal inventory discrepancies, or “shortfalls,” that may lead to broader investigations and significant legal consequences. Providers should understand how to resolve these allegations and limit liability arising from inventory management errors.
Common Sources of Inventory Discrepancies
First, it is important to note that the vast majority of inventory discrepancies arise from inadvertence or human error. Many pharmacists fail to timely update their pharmacy management software when NDCs change, particularly generics, because the focus is on dispensing the correct drug. Nonetheless, the PBMs do not accept that AWP may be the same across all products, and thus immaterial.
In addition, automatic refill prompts may cause prescriptions to be placed in the "will call" bin for medications that patients may not need, particularly if their underlying medical condition involves variable levels of adherence, such as for diabetics and patients with lung or bronchial disorders.
Other common mistakes involve the dispensing of generics in place of brand, particularly where the same manufacturer markets both a generic and branded version of the drug in virtually identical packaging, i.e., certain insulins. Similarly, discrepancies may result from employee misconduct and theft.
Finally, billing discrepancies may or may not result from inventory discrepancies, but our focus for purposes of this discussion is the billing of medication that was never dispensed or ordered.
Inventory Shortfalls Involving Controlled Substances
Second, different requirements apply with respect to shortages of controlled substances, which will be closely scrutinized given the regulatory climate. DEA regulations require the filing of a Form 106 that discloses the theft or significant loss of controlled substances within one business day of discovery.
In addition to PBM audits, DEA Diversion Investigators are required by annual work plans to conduct regulator inspections/audits of DEA registrants, and any unexplained inventory discrepancies likely will referred for further investigation by law enforcement. Due to intense scrutiny around the opioid epidemic, these referrals are more likely to be pursued.
Potential Solutions to Identified Inventory Shortfalls
Third, following a PBM audit or DEA inspection that uncovers inventory shortfalls, there are a number of possible outcomes. Providers may need to fight network suspension or termination; administrative and licensing proceedings; civil lawsuits; and potential criminal charges.
At this stage, the focus should be on limiting liability and the more severe potential consequences through a well-organized and strategic defense strategy. Consideration should be given to whether the inventory discrepancy can credibly be described as an operational issue, or whether other factors, such as referral relationships, lack of medical necessity, and high-reimbursing products, will require some attention and explanation.
Finally, mistakes are just that, and we all make them. Inventory discrepancies are serious challenges, but they can be resolved satisfactorily, with no or limited consequences to your business or livelihood. Here at HLA, we rely on our attorneys' experience as former top-level McKesson executives and prosecutors to approach these cases with more insight and knowledge than the other side. This equation is our formula for success because it allows us to explain to the other side the ways in which their analysis is flawed, leading to resolution. Please do not hesitate to contact us for a free consultation to learn more about our approach.
MORE ARTICLES BY CATEGORY
California Hospice Fraud Crackdown: What it Means for Providers & How to Protect Your Business
California’s hospice fraud crackdown is only the beginning of what CMS and Medi-Cal regulators have claimed will be many more cases brought against hospice facilities and home health agencies. Providers who do not timely respond to a suspension or revocation may waive important rights. Act now to protect your business and reputation from governmental overreach based on data mining and other unreliable sources.
Read More >>The WISeR Model: A New Era of Prior Authorization and Audit Risks for Wound Care
On January 1, 2026, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) officially launched the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) Model. This initiative is not just another administrative hurdle; it is a technology-driven enforcement overhaul aimed directly at the wound care industry.
Read More >>OMIG Audit Defense New York: What the 2026 Work Plan Means for Providers
Every year, the New York Office of the Medicaid Inspector General (OMIG) releases its Work Plan outlining enforcement priorities. The 2026 plan sends a clear signal that Medicaid providers in New York are entering a far more aggressive enforcement environment.
Read More >>PBM Member Denial Audit Findings: A Growing Threat to Pharmacies
Pharmacies undergoing a Pharmacy Benefit Manager (PBM) audit are typically prepared to address inventory discrepancies and documentation issues. What many are not prepared for, however, is the increasing use of PBM member denial findings, allegations that a patient claims they did not receive and/or did not authorize the dispensing of a medication for which a claim was submitted.
Read More >>
