 |
October 2006
Note: Questions relating to state legislative activity or any of the items noted in ACS Cross Country may be directed to Mindy Baker, State Affairs Associate, at mbaker@facs.org.
Texas Taxes Business Income
During a special session earlier this year, the Texas legislature sent a bill to the governor replacing some property taxes with a business tax (1 percent on gross receipts) and a $1 increase in the cigarette tax. HB 3 exempts sole proprietors from paying the tax, although a business set up as a professional association will be taxed even if owned by only one physician. The new law permits physicians to deduct the costs of providing charity care and uncompensated care from taxable income. Rules will be written to define how this care should be tracked and deducted.
For more information, visit the Texas Medical Association Web site at http://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx?id=5189.
|
South Carolina's Supreme Court Ruling Impacts Out-of-State Expert Witness Testimony
In June, South Carolina’s legislature adopted Act No. 385, which deemed that out-of-state physicians who were testifying in a proceeding must obtain a limited license to do so. In addition, “the license must authorize only the practice in this State that is related directly to the particular proceeding for which it is issued. A separate license must be obtained for each proceeding in which the applicant is engaged to testify as an expert medical witness in this State.”
On August 24, the Supreme Court of South Carolina found that “the effect of the revised statutes has the potential to substantially impair the orderly administration of justice,” and is “ambiguous as to its relevance to pre-trial practices and proceedings that are of fundamental importance to the judicial process” and ordered a “temporarily delay [of] judicial enforcement” until the “General Assembly provides further clarity on this matter.”
To read the Court’s full ruling, please visit: http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/opinions/displayOrder.cfm?orderNo=215
|
PIP Fee Proposal by New Jersey’s Department of Banking
On August 18, New Jersey’s Department of Banking and Insurance announced they will propose new regulations setting a fee schedule for Personal Injury Protection insurance tied to the Medicare fee schedule (Proposal Number PRN 2006-293).
This proposal will essentially set most rates at about 130 percent of Medicare and will impact facility fees for ambulatory facilities. If the department calculates fees as a percentage of the Medicare fee schedule, and if the federal government does not fix the SGR/physician reimbursement update formula, personal injury protection insurance will be cut automatically.
The New Jersey Chapter is urging their Fellows to submit comments on the proposal by November 4, 2006 to the Department of Banking and Insurance. (See side box for contact information.)
For more information, please contact Arthur Ellenberger, Executive Director, NJ Chapter, ACS, 973/239-9392.
To read the full proposal, please visit: http://www.state.nj.us/dobi/pipinfo/pr06_293.pdf#search=%22Proposal%20Number%20PRN%202006-293%22.
|
Robert Melillo, Chief
Legislative and Regulatory Affairs
Department of Banking and Insurance
20 West State Street
PO Box 325
Trenton, NJ 08625
|
|
Fax: 609/292-0896
|
E-mail: legsregs@dobi.state.nj.us
|
|
|
Louisiana Appeals Court Strikes Down 20-Year-Old Cap on Damages
Louisiana’s cap on total damages was struck down by an appeals court in September. The court’s decision was split 3-2, with Judge Pickett authoring the majority opinion. The Court ruled that because the cap was originally enacted in 1975 and with the devaluation of the dollar the $500,000 cap is worth much less than it was originally intended and thus does not constitute an “adequate remedy” under Louisiana law.
The case was remanded back to the trial courts so they may determine what would constitute “adequate damages” in this case. However, the case is expected to head to the Louisiana Supreme Court.
To read the court’s full opinion, please visit: http://www.la3circuit.org/opinions/2006/09/092706/04-1069opi.pdf
|
|
|
California Governor Vetoes Single Payer Legislation
Recently vetoed by the governor, SB 840 would have created a single payer system in California. According to an article in the Sacramento Bee, “Under SB 840, private medical groups and hospitals would continue to provide care as usual but they would be paid through a state system. In theory, payroll taxes and individual income taxes would replace the premiums that individuals and businesses now pay to insurers. The bill does not actually allocate funding for the new system.”
(Benson, Clea. “Governor to Veto Universal Health Care” Sacramento Bee on the Web 6 September 2006. http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060906/NEWS/609060314)
In his veto message the Governor said he believed the bill “would require an extraordinary redirection of public and private funding by creating a vast new bureaucracy to take over health insurance and medical care for Californians - a serious and expensive mistake.”
To read the full text of the Governor's veto message, please visit: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0801-0850/sb_840_vt_20060922.html
|
|
Past Issues of ACS Cross Country:
|
ACS State Affairs
|
|
Division of Advocacy and Health Policy
|
Jon H. Sutton
Manager, State Affairs
Chicago Headquarters
312-202-5358
jsutton@facs.org |
Mindy Baker
State Affairs Associate
Chicago Headquarters
312-202-5363
mbaker@facs.org |
Some of these files are in Adobe Acrobat format. To view Portable Document Files (PDF) download the free  Adobe Acrobat Reader. Reminder: The Adobe Acrobat Reader ranges from 3.9 mb to 7.4 mb depending on the operating system your computer uses. Please allow for sufficient download time.
Revised October 4, 2006
Advocacy and Health Policy
This page and all contents are Copyright © 2003-2006
by the American College of Surgeons, Chicago, IL 60611-3211
|
|
