Prostate Biopsy Reimbursement Cut 70%+

[yaah]

This really isnt that big of a deal and wont affect too many people. In-office labs are the ones getting pushed over the cliff and Plandowski knows it.

This is a much bigger deal for reference labs and in office labs.

Prostate biopsy reimbursement is not being cut 70% unless you are billing and collecting the full amount for 88305 x 20 or whatever, compared to the new payment. The difference is far less for 88305 x 6 vs the new payment.

And this is not true everywhere either. This is just one medicare contractor. Others are sure to follow no doubt.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DoctwoB]

Thanks.

Man this is going to be a rough time for those of us just getting started in the last few years.

Our Medicare Tax is going up to fund ACA. Our revenue on TC will be going down as part of ACA. And soon our income taxes will go up because we are the "bad people" whose success was given to us and not earned and so we should be eager to participate in wealth redistribution. And we will continue to see CMS ratchet back our fees and who is going to care because we are just a bunch of rich doctors anyway.

Heard them say at the DNC that healthcare costs have gone up 300% over inflation the last few years. Well talking to my colleagues pathology incomes have been stable and actually declined a bit over the last 20 years. So I don't think we are the problem.

To be fair, the tax increases Obama is proposing are affecting people making over 1 million a year. So unless pathologists are doing VERY well, I doubt this effects you.

 

[pathstudent]

To be fair, the tax increases Obama is proposing are affecting people making over 1 million a year. So unless pathologists are doing VERY well, I doubt this effects you.

No it is 250k (that's the definition of millionaire they use). Plus our reimbursement is getting ratcheted back because we are "specialists". Plus our tax for Medicare is going to go up 1% for people in our income range.

So our incomes are going down and our taxes are going up. Yet as far as I can tell pathologist revenue has not driven up the cost of medicine at all.

But it's ok because we didn't earn this. We didn't do the hard work to get here. It was all given to us by the government so we néed to give it all back. So we can be good citizens and not viewed as evil demons by the middle class.

But this is a topic for another thread.

I disagree with yaah. I think palmetto announcement has to apply to all of medicare. It wouldn't make sense for one payor to pay less than the rest. The rules have to be the same across the board.

 

[Path or bust]

No it is 250k (that's the definition of millionaire they use). Plus our reimbursement is getting ratcheted back because we are "specialists". Plus our tax for Medicare is going to go up 1% for people in our income range.

So our incomes are going down and our taxes are going up. Yet as far as I can tell pathologist revenue has not driven up the cost of medicine at all.

But it's ok because we didn't earn this. We didn't do the hard work to get here. It was all given to us by the government so we néed to give it all back. So we can be good citizens and not viewed as evil demons by the middle class.

But this is a topic for another thread.

I disagree with yaah. I think palmetto announcement has to apply to all of medicare. It wouldn't make sense for one payor to pay less than the rest. The rules have to be the same across the board.

Are you a Republican by any chance?

 

[deleted314957]

To be fair, the tax increases Obama is proposing are affecting people making over 1 million a year. So unless pathologists are doing VERY well, I doubt this effects you.

also dividends will be taxed as ordinary income vs. the 15% now for qualified dividends and if you make >250k there is a 3.6% "penalty" added to the dividend tax and capital gains. so dividend tax goes from 15% to >40%

 

[pathstudent]

Are you a Republican by any chance?

No. I am not so mindless to vote for a party no matter what.

 

[lipomas]

No. I am not so mindless to vote for a party no matter what.

Yeah well 80% of the country is, so tough nuts.

 

[KCShaw]

I'm always up for a party.

Well, not so much as I used to be, I suppose.

Irresistible tangent.

I do, however, find it somewhat interesting that there is only loose agreement as to what this reimbursement change will really mean to the various directly and indirectly afflicted groups, and ultimately to the big picture -- much less agreement regarding what to do about it. As much as I dislike arrogant and sometimes wrong certainty, there are times when languid uncertainty is the worse of the evils. If we don't look at the big picture, someone else (big business &/or the feds) most likely will -- and will do so with a very different eye and very different goals.