CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
CONTINGENCIES	Sep. 30, 2024
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	CONTINGENCIES On July 30 and August 12, 2021, two putative securities class action lawsuits were commenced in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California naming as defendants Ardelyx and two current officers captioned Strezsak v. Ardelyx, Inc., et al., Case No. 4:21-cv-05868-HSG, and Siegel v. Ardelyx, Inc., et al., Case No. 5:21-cv-06228-HSG (together, the "Securities Class Actions"). The complaints allege that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), as amended, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, by making false and misleading statements and omissions of material fact related to tenapanor. The plaintiffs seek damages and interest, and an award of costs, including attorneys’ fees. On July 19, 2022, the court consolidated the two putative class actions and appointed a lead plaintiff and lead counsel. The lead plaintiff filed a second amended complaint under which the plaintiffs seek to represent all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Ardelyx securities between March 6, 2020 and July 19, 2021. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on June 2, 2023. On March 22, 2024, the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court provided plaintiffs a third opportunity to amend and plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on April 19, 2024. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the third amended complaint on June 3, 2024. The case was dismissed with prejudice on September 12, 2024. On October 9, 2024, plaintiff appealed the District Court's dismissal of the case to the Ninth Circuit. We believe the plaintiffs' claims are without merit and we have not recorded any accrual for a contingent liability associated with these legal proceedings. On December 7, 2021 and March 29, 2022, two verified shareholders derivative lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California purportedly on behalf of Ardelyx against certain of Ardelyx’s executive officers and members of our board of directors, captioned Go v. Raab, et al., Case No. 4:21-cv-09455-HSG, and Morris v. Raab, et al., Case No. 4:22-cv-01988-JSC. The complaints allege that the defendants' violations of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets for personally making and/or causing Ardelyx to make materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations and prospects. The complaint seeks contribution under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from two executive officers. On January 19, and April 27, 2022, the court granted the parties’ stipulation to stay the Go and Morris actions, respectively, until resolution of the anticipated motion(s) to dismiss in the Securities Class Actions. On October 25, 2022, the parties filed a stipulation to consolidate and stay the Go and Morris actions, and on October 27, 2022, the court consolidated the Go and Morris action and stayed the consolidated action pending resolution of the anticipated motion(s) to dismiss in the Securities Class Action. The consolidated case remains stayed pending resolution of the appeal in the Securities Class Action. We believe the plaintiffs' claims are without merit and we have not recorded any accrual for a contingent liability associated with these legal proceedings. On July 17, 2024, the Company, in partnership with the American Association of Kidney Patients (AAKP) and the National Minority Quality Forum (NMQF), filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), claiming that CMS has violated its statutory and regulatory authority under the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA), which established the ESRD PPS bundled payment system for dialysis services in 2008. Specifically, the lawsuit claims that CMS’s plan to move XPHOZAH, along with all oral-only drugs, into the ESRD PPS is inconsistent with MIPPA’s statutory provision, and contradicts CMS’s own regulations. XPHOZAH and other oral-only drugs, which are currently available to patients under Medicare Part D, are not administered by dialysis providers and cannot be taken during the delivery of maintenance dialysis. The Company, AAKP and NMQF are seeking relief under the Administrative Procedure Act to enjoin CMS from proceeding with its plan to include XPHOZAH in the ESRD PPS and eliminate coverage under Medicare Part D beginning on January 1, 2025. On September 17, 2024, defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss, the case, and on September 19, 2024, plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction or, in the Alternative, for Expedited Summary Judgment. On August 16, 2024, a complaint was filed against the Company in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, captioned Yarborough v. Ardelyx, Inc., et al., No. 24-cv-12119 (D. Mass.). The complaint names the Company, Mike Raab, and Justin Renz as defendants and alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, related to the Company’s announcement on July 2, 2024 that it had chosen not to file an application for Transitional Drug Add-on Payment Adjustment (TDAPA) for XPHOZAH (the "Yarborough Action"). The plaintiffs seek damages and interest, and an award of costs, including attorneys' fees. Two shareholders filed motions to be appointed lead plaintiff in the Yarborough Action on October 15, 2024. The court has not yet appointed a lead plaintiff. We believe the plaintiff's claims are without merit and we have not recorded any accrual for a contingent liability associated with these legal proceedings. On September 6 and 13, 2024, certain Ardelyx shareholders filed two verified derivative complaints purportedly on behalf of the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and/or 14(a) of the Exchange Act, breaches of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, waste, and aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty against certain members of our board of directors and management based on substantially the same factual allegations in the Yarborough Action. The complaints seek unspecified damages and corporate governance reforms, as well as costs and attorneys' fees. On September 25, 2024, the Court consolidated the two derivative actions into the case In re Ardelyx, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Case No. 1:24-cv-12302-LTS (D. Mass.). We believe the plaintiffs' claims are without merit and we have not recorded any accrual for a contingent liability associated with these legal proceedings. From time to time, we may be involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. As of September 30, 2024, there is no litigation pending that would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition, and no contingent liabilities were accrued as of September 30, 2024.