> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.consumernews.ai/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # FTC probes company behind MyChart, which tracks millions of health records - URL: https://www.consumernews.ai/ftc-probes-company-behind-mychart-which-tracks-millions-of-health-records/ - Published: 2026-08-18T13:58:28.000Z - Updated: 2026-08-18T13:58:28.000Z - Author: James R. Hood - **The Federal Trade Commission is investigating Epic Systems, the giant health-records company behind MyChart and software used by providers treating more than 280 million Americans.** - **Investigators are reportedly examining whether Epic improperly restricts competitors’ access to patient data — potentially limiting competition in a market at the center of modern health care.** - **For patients, the fight raises a basic question: Who really controls your medical record when hospitals, insurers and outside health apps need to exchange it?** The federal government is investigating whether one of the most powerful — and largely invisible — companies in American health care has used its control over electronic medical records to suppress competition. The Federal Trade Commission has opened an antitrust investigation into [Epic Systems](https://www.epic.com/?ref=consumernews.ai), according to Reuters, which cited two people familiar with the matter. The FTC has sent investigative demands to companies in the health-technology industry seeking information about how Epic grants or restricts access to patient data, according to a Reuters report in [Insurance Journal](https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2026/08/17/881655.htm?ref=consumernews.ai). Epic is hardly a household name, but its software sits between millions of Americans and their medical information. The Wisconsin-based company operates the widely used MyChart patient portal and provides electronic health-record systems to hospitals and medical practices around the country. Epic says health providers using its products collectively treat more than 280 million U.S. patients. That scale makes the FTC inquiry much more than a dispute among software companies. At stake are the systems that determine how easily medical records can move among doctors, hospitals, insurers and other health-care services. ## What the FTC is looking at Neither the FTC nor Epic has disclosed details of the investigation. [Reuters reported](https://www.reuters.com/world/us-ftc-probing-health-records-company-epic-systems-2026-08-14/?ref=consumernews.ai), however, that regulators are asking industry participants about the way Epic provides — or withholds — access to data stored in its systems. Epic denies engaging in anticompetitive conduct. “We’re leaders in interoperability to support patient care, and we do not engage in anticompetitive behavior,” an Epic spokesperson told Reuters. Epic has also maintained that hospitals and other health-care providers, rather than Epic itself, ultimately control access to patient records. The FTC declined to comment. The investigation comes after several other challenges to Epic's business practices. ## Texas has already sued Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton [sued Epic](https://www.naag.org/multistate-case/texas-v-epic-systems-corp/?ref=consumernews.ai) in December 2025, alleging that the company uses its position in electronic medical records to make it harder for hospitals to use competing products. The Texas lawsuit alleges that Epic can restrict competitors’ access to data and impose fees or other obstacles on health systems that want to use rival services. It also challenges aspects of MyChart involving parental access to teenagers' medical records, [The Wall Street Journal](https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/texas-sues-medical-tech-firm-epic-systems-over-parent-access-to-child-records-4436fbc3?utm%5Fsource=chatgpt.com) reported. Epic has called the Texas allegations flawed and misguided and says its customers regularly share information with outside applications. The case illustrates a larger issue underlying the FTC investigation: Electronic medical records were supposed to make health information easier to move from one provider to another. But control of the software connecting those records can itself become an important source of market power. ## A competitor's lawsuit is also moving ahead Health-data company [Particle Health](https://www.particlehealth.com/?ref=consumernews.ai) [sued Epic](https://www.particlehealth.com/blog/epic-systems-stranglehold-on-u-s-medical-records-harms-patient-care-lawsuit?ref=consumernews.ai) in federal court in 2024, accusing it of monopolizing parts of the medical-records market and interfering with Particle's ability to serve insurers and other customers. Particle provides technology that retrieves and analyzes patient records, including information insurers traditionally gathered through slower manual processes. It alleged that Epic erected barriers that discouraged prospective clients from doing business with Particle. “Epic Systems controls the medical information of nearly every American – meaning one private company has unchecked power over our health care,” [said](https://www.consumernews.ai/amazon-brings-back-forced-arbitration-and-makes-it-harder-for-customers-to-sue/) Particle Health CEO Jason Prestinario. “Now, Epic is using that power to thwart an emerging industry intended to bring payers and providers into closer collaboration for better patient care.” Epic denied the charges and accused Particle of obtaining confidential medical information under improper pretenses — an allegation Particle disputed. In September 2025, a federal judge rejected Epic's attempt to dismiss a significant part of Particle's antitrust case, allowing allegations that Epic unlawfully monopolized a market involving medical records to proceed. ## There's another side to the data-access battle The controversy is complicated by a genuine problem facing medical-record networks: Making health information easier to exchange can also make it easier to misuse. Epic itself sued several companies in January, alleging they improperly accessed more than 300,000 patient records by posing as legitimate health-care providers and then supplied some of the information to plaintiffs' lawyers looking for potential clients. The records allegedly included names, diagnoses, laboratory results and medications. In March, one telehealth company acknowledged accessing patient records under false pretenses as part of a proposed consent judgment in that litigation, although it maintained that it had acted in good faith. That creates an unusually difficult regulatory problem. Health-information systems need enough interoperability to allow patients and legitimate providers to move records where they're needed — but enough security to stop outsiders from exploiting those same connections. ## Why consumers should care Consumers normally don't choose their hospital's electronic-record vendor. Yet that vendor can have enormous influence over how readily their information follows them through the health-care system. More competition and better interoperability could make it easier for a patient changing doctors or health systems to have records transferred without repeating tests, filling out the same medical history repeatedly or tracking down information from multiple providers. It could also allow new companies to develop tools that help patients organize health records, compare care or coordinate treatment. But unrestricted access carries obvious privacy risks. Medical records contain some of the most sensitive information consumers generate, and recent litigation shows how systems designed for legitimate information exchange can potentially be abused. The FTC therefore appears to be confronting two competing concerns: **whether Epic has placed unnecessary barriers around patient information to protect its market position,** and **whether some restrictions are legitimately needed to protect patients and their data.** An FTC investigation by itself does not establish wrongdoing, and regulators have not announced any enforcement action against Epic. But with Epic's systems touching the records of hundreds of millions of Americans, the outcome could help determine something consumers have been promised for years but still don't always experience in practice: **A medical record that can safely follow the patient, rather than being effectively trapped inside the health-care system that created it.**