Federal Outlook
Tariffs? We are Talking About Tariffs?
This topic has absolutely nothing to do with health care in any way, but it could have an surprising impact on the presidential election race.
President Biden announced recently that United States Trade Representative (USTR) plans to increase tariffs significantly on $18 billion on imports of clean-energy goods from China. The increases will apply to imported steel and aluminum, legacy semiconductors, electric vehicles, battery components, critical minerals, solar cells, cranes, and medical products. The new tariff rates – which range from 100% on electric vehicles, to 50% for solar components, to 25% for all other sectors – will be implemented over the next two years.
As a refresher, because 2018 feels as close as to when the pyramids were built, in 2018 President Trump implemented sweeping tariffs, up to 25%, on over $300 billion in goods from China. These products stretched from washing machines, to apple chargers, to steel and aluminum. Trump’s goal was to pressure US manufacturers to move their supply chains out of China back to the US.
The Biden administration came to their decision after “reviewing” Trumps tariffs on China. I put “reviewing” in quotes because from my experience, the word “review” means nothing. The call for increases also came after signs that China is looking to increase production and exportation of their clean-energy goods, which has been a focal point of the Biden administration. Over the last 4 years, the Biden administration has handed out hundreds of millions in grants to increase production of EV vehicle and charging stations in the US. The early results are as good as my blood pressure after stepping on a Lego barefoot, pitiful. Demand for EVs has steadily dropped over the years, Multiple EV startups have gone under due to lack of sales, multiple automakers have rolled backed their EV development, and Tesla, the leading charging station producer, announced plans to drastically roll back their production of charging stations.
In response to Bidens tariff announcement, Trump, who calls himself the “tariff man”, said at a rally in New Jersey that if he was reelected, he would increase tariffs “200% tax on every car that comes in from those plants.” Trump would not only increase tariffs on Chinese automakers, but all cars coming imported into the US.
This sets up trade wars being a potential hot topic on the campaign trail for both Biden and Trump, who both believe in increasing tariffs on foreign goods. Now the one thing that both these men fail to realize is that the tariffs, for the most part, have not had the affect they hoped. US producers have not moved their supply chains out of China and back to the US. At best they have moved production to other countries like India; Or they passed on their increased costs of production to consumers, which hurts the consumer the most.
Alternative ideas that they should look at is creating additional tax breaks for companies that open plants in U.S., especially those that are moving production back to the US. Give out grants to teach workers to work in these types of plants, that can be making multiple products in one facility. Look to offset China’s currency manipulation by buying the Yen, making the Yen buying power stronger and the US dollar weaker, and in turn making US good cheaper and Chinese goods more expensive. Lastly, the U.S. should go back to embracing truly free trade. Free trade helps our economy grow, increases access to higher-quality, lower-priced goods, improves efficiency and innovation, and increases competition.
Federal Recap
Medicaid 80/20 Rule
Well after over a year of speculation, the Biden Administration announced their plans to make major change to the home and community services under Medicaid. CMS released their final Medicaid access rule in late April, which includes substantial changes to many Medicaid services. Some of the changes are positive, including creating a new HCBS quality reporting system and increasing payment rate transparency. But on the other side, the rule including language would require home-based care providers to use 80% of the Medicaid reimbursements they receive toward direct care worker compensation. It’s like finding out that you must work overtime the whole week for no extra pay, but at least your boss throws you a pizza party.
CMS originally released their proposed rule in April of 2023, in response to massive home care workforce shortage across the country, that have led to long wait times, with nearly 700,000 Americans languishing on waiting lists every year since 2016 according to one estimate. The rule would apply to direct care workers that provide homemaker, home health aide; personal care services, that fall under select Medicaid 1915 waiver services (MA Frail Elder Waiver & the MA Community Living Waiver) and the 1115 waiver services (MassHealth). CMS defines a direct care worker as a worker that:
- Provide nursing services
- Assist with ADLs and IADLs
- Provide behavioral supports, employment supports, or other services to promote community integration.
Specifically includes:
- Nurses (RNs, LPNs, NPs, Clinical Nurse Specialists) • Licensed or certified nursing assistants
- Direct support professionals
- Personal care attendants
- Home health aides
- “Other individuals” paid to directly provide Medicaid services that address ADLs/IADLs, behavioral supports, employment supports, or other services to promote community integration, including nurses and other staff providing clinical supervision.
CMS defines compensation as:
- Salary;
- Wages;
- Other remuneration as defined by the Fair Labor Standards Act;
- Benefits: health and dental benefits, life and disability insurance, paid leave, retirement, tuition reimbursement.
- The employer share of payroll taxes for direct care workers, specifically including FICA taxes, unemployment insurance, and worker compensation.
The final rule allows providers up to 6 years to demonstrate compliance with the new rules, an increase from 3 from the proposal, and states have the option to offer “hardship exemptions” and give small providers a lower threshold than the 80% mandate. CMS hopes that the new rule will help to lure workers to the field and bring stability to the workforce.
HCA, along with providers across the nation, could not disagree more with the proposed 80/20 rule. HCA, along with others, submitted comments to CMS highlighting the dangerous effect that the proposed rule could have on already strapped agencies across the country. “This is a misguided policy that will result in agency closures, force providers to exit the Medicaid program, and will ultimately make access issues worse around the country. As NAHC and our partners across the home care industry have demonstrated, such a provision is not only unworkable due to the varied nature of Medicaid programs across the country, but CMS also lacks statutory authority to impose this mandate.” Said The National Association for Home Care and Hospice (NAHC). Jennifer Sheets, co-chair of the NAHC Medicaid Advisory Council (MAC) reiterated the same sentiment about the rule, “We know that CMS has good intentions and a desire to improve the lives of workers, but this policy is ill-advised and will have serious negative impacts on providers and their clients around the country.”
Swiftly after CMS released the 80/20 Medicaid access rule, Congress moved to introduce legislation that would block implementation. Rep. Cammack (R-FL-3). The bill would prevent the Department of Health and Human Services from finalizing the “80/20” rule and to prevent the Department from promulgating, implementing, enforcing, or giving effect to any substantially similar rule requiring a minimum percentage of Medicaid spending on home and community-based services (HCBS) providers be spent on compensation for direct workers. Click the link HERE like to write to your Representative urging them to support HR.8114.
State Outlook
A Billion Here, A Billion There
Budget season is officially upon us. The House recently passed their proposed$58 billion budget for FY25, that invests in K-12 education, childcare and public transit. The House proposal does not call for tax increases, seeks to push overall state spending up by about 3.3 percent, or $2 billion, and aims to drive up the state rainy day fund balance to nearly $9 billion.
Two weeks later Senate leadership released their proposed $57.9 billion budget bill for FY25. The Senate budget is similar to the House’s proposal in many ways, but also stretches to propose a pair of novel ideas: free community college and regional transit authority trips. The Senate proposal would cover another year of free school meals, pay for another year of the multi-year K-12 funding law known as the Student Opportunity Act, and direct more money to strained emergency family shelters without seeking additional systemic reforms.’ All three budget proposals — Healey’s, the House’s and the Senate Ways and Means Committee’s — seek $325 million for the emergency family shelter system. That amount would level-fund the line item compared to fiscal 2024, though Beacon Hill already agreed via a bill Healey signed in April to allow the use of $175 million from savings on shelter costs in fiscal 2025.
The Senate proposal calls for $100 million less in spending than the final $58 billion House-approved budget. That annual rate of growth would rank close to the bottom over the past decade, and it represents a marked shift from the spending spree Democrats enacted in the past two years — 9.1 percent spending increase in fiscal 2023, 6.9 percent in fiscal 2024 — with the support of Republican Gov. Charlie Baker and then Healey. The fiscal conservation comes after months of lacking revenue collection for the state.
HCA is working with our legislative champions to insert the rate clarifying bill language in the outside section of the Senate budget proposal through the amendment process. Please use THIS LINK to write to your State Senator, to urge them to co-sponsor Amendment #535, Clarifying Rate Setting Processes for Home Health and Home Care Services.
An amendment was submitted that would require quarterly reporting on wages provided through the chapter 257-line item, 1599-6903. HCA is working with our legislative champions and the Senate Ways and Means committee to block the amendment from being passed.
State Recap
HCA Licensure Bill Moved to Health Care Financing
HCA Licensure bill that would create licensure system for non-medical home care services was voted our favorably by the Committee on Rules and was sent to House Health Care Financing. HCA has continued to advocate to committee staff for the importance of passing this bill this session. HCA will provide further updates as the bill progresses through the legislative process.
State House Unveil Expansive Hospital and Industry Reform Bill
In the wake of the ongoing Steward Hospital fiasco, on Tuesday, House leadership unveiled their highly anticipated hospital oversight and industry reform bill. The Legislature’s Health Care Financing Committee on Tuesday moved to advance a redrafted, 97-page proposal that combines lessons learned from the Steward Health Care crisis, major changes to how state regulators work to contain health care spending, and new tools to deal with facility expansions and closures. Officials in House Speaker Ron Mariano’s office pitched the wide-ranging bill as the biggest effort to contain health care costs since the 2012 law that established the Health Policy Commission, the Center for Health Information and Analysis and an annual benchmark representing a goal for spending growth.
A key component of the bill aims to strengthen data-reporting requirements and consequences. Hospitals would need to disclose audited financial statements about out-of-state operations for their parent organizations, certain private equity investors, real estate investment trusts, and management services organizations. They would also face much higher fines for falling short of those requirements, boosted from $1,000 per violation to $25,000 per violation with no maximum cap. The bill additionally empowers DPH to block certain licensure or expansion approval against a system that has failed to submit appropriate financial data to the state. The redrafted legislation would also overhaul health care cost containment and management at the state level, including by changing the existing one-year benchmark to a three-year cycle. Mariano’s office said a longer time period would better account for dips and spikes in spending by individual entities.
Senate President Karen Spilka did not commit to taking up the bill in the Senate. The Senate will likely look to expand upon the proposed bill or propose their own bill that would include more prescription drug legislation and/or strengthen the Health Policy Commissions authority.
Think Home Care Blog 