PDA

View Full Version : Affordable Health Care - Medical Devices excise tax



Irving
11-07-2012, 22:39
I wanted to post up an example of an actual part of the Affordable Health Care Act, that is actually hurting/going to hurt industry in the US.

Part of the Affordable Health Care Act mandates that starting January 1, 2013, manufacturers of medical devices must now pay a 2.3% excise task on the medical devices that they produce. I will post a few articles, and you have to sift through a little BS here and there, but the result should be easy enough to see.

Here the MDMA (Medical Device Manufacturers Association) talks about the tax, but they say that it will be levied against a company's revenue. I don't believe that to be true, as that would cause businesses to close up shop and/or relocate over seas, over night.

http://www.medicaldevices.org/issues/Health-Care-Reform,-Device-Tax/

What is the medical device tax?
The $20B tax was included in the Affordable Care Act that was signed into law in 2010. The amount is based on a 2.3% excise tax that will be levied on the total revenues of a company, regardless of whether a company generates a profit, starting in 2013. Many companies will owe more in taxes than they generate from their operations. The result will be devastating to innovation, patient care and job creation.

Here is a Forbes article about the issue that brings up a major discussion point. This piece has more editorial commentary than is necessary (any), but it brings up the same point I want to make.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/billflax/2012/10/09/obamacare-will-stifle-healthcare-innovation-making-it-a-real-pain/


The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities claim this won’t inhibit innovation since rising expenses may spur cost saving measures. Gee, let’s create more problems to solve. Obamacare’s apologists also suggest that because insurance coverage will expand, medical device sales may surge offsetting margin compression. Yet, industry experts refute this noting Medicare already disproportionately covers their customers.

-Obama administration says that medical device manufacturers should be happy, because with forced insurance coverage, they will now have more customers.

Obviously this is flawed thinking, as many (most?) of the new people to have health care will be young and healthy, therefor not needing health services. Second, these new people are not the customers of these manufacturers, the customers are the medical facilities. Just because there are 100 new people with health care, doesn't mean that the clinic will all the sudden need more x-ray machines. Finally, this 2.3% tax will just be passed onto the clinics, which will be passed onto the patients, which will be passed onto the insurance companies, which will just raise prices. Affordable? Hardly.

Here is a Huffington Post article that is by far the most informative.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/04/medical-device-tax-repeal-bill_n_1567328.html


Democrats say the growing medical device industry can afford the 2.3 percent tax. They describe the tax as part of the price device manufacturers and other providers agreed to pay in exchange for the tens of millions of new customers they will get through the sweeping 2010 health care law's expansion of health insurance coverage.

That's not the view of Republicans or the medical device industry, which has lobbied Congress heavily to kill the tax before it takes hold. GOP lawmakers have named their legislation the Protect Medical Innovation Act, and insist it is not aimed at dismantling Obama's health care law.

Bowtie
11-07-2012, 23:56
It will be passed on through just like you said. I don't think it will break any company. I work for a company that supplies parts for a manufacturer that recently merged with 2 of their competitors and they are now ordering 10 times what they were buying last year. I dont know if its because their customers are trying to buy before 2013 or their sales have increased that much.

Irving
11-08-2012, 00:12
I have family and friends (about 4-5 people) that all work at the same medical supply company here in town. Gotp text today from some of them, freaking out about this because they got briefed about it in a company meeting. It was presented as in the first article as a tax levied against revenue, and that they might be looking for new jobs.

I tried to explain that while it sucks for the industry, theor jobs will most likely be okay.

Aloha_Shooter
11-08-2012, 07:43
It probably IS a tax on total revenue. That's how Obama operates. The companies that can will attempt to shift the whole tax load to the product consumers (and therefore the insurance companies or government). In the end, we all pay an increasingly burdened rate for the illusion of money flowing into government coffers. This is a point of economics that Paul Krugman and BHO just don't get. They don't want to get it.

What about those companies that CAN'T shift the entire burden onto their consumers? Oh yeah, they'll fold along with their jobs. Sorry about that, gotta protect Sandra Flouck's right to taxpayer-funded birth control, y'know.

StevenP
11-08-2012, 14:59
I cannot see any easy way around this other then massive layoffs and plants closing down and moving overseas. Companies that are left are force to become more efficient and enact aggressive costs cutting measure in order to stay open.

Passing the costs to the customer may not be feasable since they will be seeking a substitute products.

ChunkyMonkey
11-08-2012, 15:18
Or inflation. Most businesses have to raise prices to cover the raising cost.

Irving
11-08-2012, 15:55
They can't pass the buck if it is levied against total revenue. Plus, not all companies sell only medical devices, so if the tax was levied against total revenue, the sales from other products, and any other revenue sources they gave would also be taxed. It would be a literal existence tax. Since profits for MOST companies is 5% or less of total revenue, taxing half of that profit from the get go would be a game ender for the entire industry.

StevenP
11-08-2012, 16:31
+1 Irving. It's a game ender.

sellersm
11-08-2012, 16:33
Wait a minute, Obamacare isn't a TAX!?!?! </tongue in cheek>

The bigger question is 'why' are they taxing the medical device industry?

Ronin13
11-08-2012, 16:41
Wait a minute, Obamacare isn't a TAX!?!?! </tongue in cheek>

The bigger question is 'why' are they taxing the medical device industry?

It's the democrat way- if it exists, tax it! [Mad]

hammer03
11-08-2012, 23:33
They can't pass the buck if it is levied against total revenue. Plus, not all companies sell only medical devices, so if the tax was levied against total revenue, the sales from other products, and any other revenue sources they gave would also be taxed. It would be a literal existence tax. Since profits for MOST companies is 5% or less of total revenue, taxing half of that profit from the get go would be a game ender for the entire industry.

The bigger companies (with other productive dept's and a good financial/legal team) will split into sister companies, and allow the small company to show a much lower revenue. Or just stop making medical devices.


Anyone heard what the group looking to open up on the north end of the Springs has to say about this? They are building a giant facility here, one of the (many, many) companies leaving CA for similar reasons...

Aloha_Shooter
11-09-2012, 14:44
They can't pass the buck if it is levied against total revenue.

I don't see where you get that. Businesses frequently amortize enterprise-wide costs against the sales line, they have to. Of course it means the cost growth will be even higher than you'd think because they're offsetting taxes on revenue not related to the product but 1) Obama's goal is government funded healthcare anyway so anything that increases shock value works in his favor and 2) the increased costs (for those businesses that remain) will force MORE people to cover purchases with insurance or Medicare. Obama doesn't understand (or care) that this will just exacerbate current cost problems and lack of competitive supply.

Irving
11-09-2012, 16:19
I don't see where you get that.

Likely a result of my limited understanding of accounting.

ChunkyMonkey
11-09-2012, 16:30
I am helping a local doctor with a 2nd mtg.. His reason to cash out? He is required to purchase a software for the new patient record icloud which is costing him 100k!!!! No way this third party cost of Obama care does not affect private practices.

Aloha_Shooter
11-09-2012, 16:56
Well, I'm no accountant either. I'd rather do physics than finance. However, all successful businesses essentially add up their total costs -- including taxes -- and spread those costs into the prices charged for their products. If profits from the sales of those products don't AT LEAST cover their costs of production, marketing and other "incidental" costs (like confiscatory taxes), the business is going to take a loss. The size of that loss tells you how long the business's cash and credit reserves will last; after that, it's TANGO UNIFORM time.

Let's say you can make 50,000 widgets a year at a cost of $5 each and 200,000 widget-lites per year at a cost of $3.50 each. Total production costs of $950K. You spend $100K marketing all these widgets and widget-lites, $100K in insurances, $50K in state licenses, inspections, etc. and another $50K in other incidental expenses (maintenance, entertainment, company Christmas party, etc.) for a total cost of $1.25M. Your market surveys tell you that you can sell the widget-lites for $5 each and the widgets for $8 each. Yay, you have revenue of $1.4M or a profit of $150K but ooops, now you have to pay a 2.3% Obamacare tax on the total revenue ($1.4M) or $32200. That leaves you with $117.8K before income taxes -- figure you pay $57.8K in taxes (just to make the math easier) for a net $60K. At least it's a profit -- suppose you find you can only sell the widgets for $7.50 and the widget-lites for $4.75? Now you gross $1.325M which is $1.2945M after Obamacare tax or $44.5K after expenses (and before income taxes).

buckshotbarlow
11-11-2012, 15:52
here's what i just posted in the general forum...

http://www.coachisright.com/special-reports/50-dangers-from-obamacare/

jerrymrc
11-11-2012, 16:22
I am helping a local doctor with a 2nd mtg.. His reason to cash out? He is required to purchase a software for the new patient record icloud which is costing him 100k!!!! No way this third party cost of Obama care does not affect private practices.

Been there. Sometimes it is kind of funny when you have to go to the property manager and tell him that $175K item with a serial # does not exist. :) More than once I have had to take a piece of paper and a disk and ask, "sure ya want to put a barcode on this?"

hammer03
11-11-2012, 17:04
I didn't make it past this:

6) Pg 58 states that government will have possession of all your health care records & history including finances and you will have to have a National ID Healthcard.7) Pg 59, lines 21-24 gives direct access to your banks accounts to compel you to pay any out-of-pocket or premium costs electronically without your previous consent.
8) PG 65, sec 164 provides for a political payoff from the Democrats and Obama; a special subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions community groups like ACORN.


So will we be required to show this ID to receive benefits? And can I start a union and demand benefits for my community organizing efforts?