SEARCH
Current Location:
>
> This Story


Log in or Register to rate this News Story
Forward Printable StoryPrint Comment

Never Miss a Story

Sign up for email alerts

 

More Industry Headlines

Innovative melanoma therapy that 'turns cancer on itself' gets $18 million David J. Mazzo, CEO at NeoStem, discusses how the vaccine therapy was developed and earned the funding

Helmet generates magnetic fields, may alleviate treatment-resistant depression May also treat PTSD, OCD, bipolar disorder and Parkinson’s disease

Ohio medical board disciplines radiologist for HIPAA violation Incident not uncommon, and underscores importance of compliance programs

Magnetic stimulation (nTMS) gives German brain surgeons new insight Pre-operative brain mapping may reduce brain surgery damage

Imagining a less invasive surgery with MRI-powered millirobots Is injecting 'millirobots' into patient spinal canals the future?

Testing equipment: Still a challenge, but getting easier Testing equipment is getting easier but no less a challenge

GE Healthcare launches Vscan Access portable ultrasound for developing regions Aims to reduce pregnancy related deaths worldwide

Proton therapy's real-world benefits accrue at PTCOG Measuring appropriate use and untapped potential with two new studies

Study confirms patient preference for receiving imaging results The referring doctor is seen as best source of info, although a majority of patients also want to view their radiology report

Announcing the 'Rosetta Stone' of advanced prostate cancer Researchers say prostate cancer not a "single disease" but 90 percent of cases yield actionable mutations

Why do veterinarians care about repealing the medical device tax?

by Loren Bonner , DOTmed News Online Editor
Momentum to repeal the medical device tax is growing on Capitol Hill. Veterinarians are the latest group to join the push to eliminate the 2.3 percent excise tax that was included in the Affordable Care Act to help pay for the cost of reform.

It might be a different story if animals were actually benefiting from the law. But it's clear that the tax is intended to subsidize the cost of human health care, and not the animals that veterinarians treat.

Story Continues Below Advertisement

Fully integrated PACS, RIS and Voice Recognition at an affordable price

We fit our RIS/PACS to match your workflow, rather than the other way around! Call us at 866-949-7227 or click here to visit our website & see our Advanced Mammography Workstations & Mammography Tracking System built into RIS



According to the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), which includes more than 84,000 veterinarians nationwide, the tax will increase the cost of medical devices that are "intended for humans," but are also used in veterinary medicine. This would potentially increase costs for veterinarians — or lead some to pass the cost on to patients, which could translate into upping the price on procedures.

Under existing U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations, devices exclusively labeled for veterinary medicine are excluded from several pre-market and post-market provisions, according to Dr. Mark Lutschaunig, director of AVMA's governmental relations division. They are also free from being "taxable medical devices". But many veterinarians purchase human X-ray and ultrasound machines, which are taxable under the law, and adapt them for their practices. Many of the expensive human imaging modalities used in veterinary medicine, such as X-ray, ultrasound, MRI, CT, are purchased second hand.

Lutschaunig believes that if the medical device tax stays, veterinarians might buy devices that are marketed exclusively for veterinarians. He also thinks that the device manufacturers will work to get more devices approved for the veterinary market.

"The AVMA does not believe that Congress intended the tax to impact veterinary medicine and has been clear that it does not support this tax, but we are now in a position where we must do what is best for both our members and the patients that we treat," said Lutschaunig.

Related:


Interested in Medical Industry News? Subscribe to DOTmed's weekly news email and always be informed. Click here, it takes just 30 seconds.
(1)

Nancy Ball

Medical Tax

October 11, 2013 09:41

As a small business owner I don't understand why a 2.3% tax would stop someone from purchasing a piece of equipment. Assuming the purchase is something that is not only needed but will be used enough and priced to turn a profit it would be very easy to add the cost of the tax into the charge for its use. At 2.3% it would add little to what you would need to charge for its use.

Log inor Register

to rate and post a comment

You Must Be Logged In To Post A Comment

Advertise
Increase Your
Brand Awareness
Auctions + Private Sales
Get The
Best Price
Buy Equipment/Parts
Find The
Lowest Price
Daily News
Read The
Latest News
Directory
Browse All
DOTmed Users
Ethics on DOTmed
View Our
Ethics Program
Gold Parts Vendor Program
Receive PH
Requests
Gold Service Dealer Program
Receive RFP/PS
Requests
Healthcare Providers
See all
HCP Tools
Jobs/Training
Find/Fill
A Job
Parts Hunter +EasyPay
Get Parts
Quotes
Recently Certified
View Recently
Certified Users
Recently Rated
View Recently
Certified Users
Rental Central
Rent Equipment
For Less
Sell Equipment/Parts
Get The
Most Money
Service Technicians Forum
Find Help
And Advice
Simple RFP
Get Equipment
Quotes
Virtual Trade Show
Find Service
For Equipment
Access and use of this site is subject to the terms and conditions of our LEGAL NOTICE & PRIVACY NOTICE
Property of and Proprietary to DOTmed.com, Inc. Copyright ©2001-2015 DOTmed.com, Inc.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED