Analysis: Medical device tax revenues could top $2B next year coverage of the medical device tax

by Brad Perriello, Brian Johnson and Arezu Sarvestani

The medical device tax set to start next year has become a lightning rod for criticism, with the med-tech industry claiming it will be catastrophic for the industry and its critics claiming those concerns are overblown.

AdvaMed, the national lobby for the medical device industry, commissioned a pair of reports it says show that the tax will kill between 39,000 and 43,000 med-tech jobs and cost the industry between $670 million and nearly $7 billion. Countering those claims, Bloomberg Government issued a report of its own saying the real cost won’t be anything like that.

But a analysis of last year’s U.S. sales for nearly 50 of the largest medical device makers reveals two potential aspects of the tax that neither side addresses:

First, the tax could have a wildly disproportionate effect on med-tech companies, depending on their margins.

Sign up to get our free newsletters delivered straight to your inbox

Further, our analysis revealed that the tax, as currently constructed, is likely to generate far more revenue than the $2 billion a year it’s designed to deliver.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) told he isn’t surprised about our findings, saying that the politicians who wrote the law "knew what they’re doing" when they created the tax.

Sen. Scott Brown

Sen. Brown

"We can’t get any accurate numbers and the numbers that are coming out now are all over the place. It’s very frustrating that it’s so tough to get a straight answer," Brown told us.

Asked if it’s fair to call his position "repeal or bust," Brown dismissed the idea of altering the scope of the med-tech tax.

"It doesn’t help to modify it by going to a lower rate," he said. "No, the bottom line is the [tax] is just there to pay for a health care bill I didn’t support in the first place."

An uneven playing field

While the tax prescribes a flat 2.3% levy from all U.S. sales of medical devices, the effects would be wildly disproportional in practice.

For several companies that posted losses last year, the tax would have pushed them further into the red, and for a few companies it would have meant a swing from profitability to losses.

For more than 75% of the other companies on our list, the tax means lower profits by between 5% and nearly 50%. Take Integra LifeSciences (NSDQ:IART), which posted U.S. medical device sales of about $593 million last year, according to Integra’s annual report. A 2.3% whack would have taken $14 million off the top line – exactly half of Integra’s 2011 profits.

At the other end of the spectrum, there’s Sirona Dental Systems (NSDQ:SIRO) and the $256 million it logged in domestic medical device sales last year. Its tax tab, had the measure been in effect, would have been $6 million, or about 5% of its $122 million in profits.

Click here for a larger interactive version of this graph

For 6 of the med-tech companies on our list, the tax would have meant more red ink, ranging from 9% (Philips (NYSE:PHG)) to 934% (Orthofix (NSDQ:OFIX)). For 3 others, the tax would have pushed them from black to red. ConMed’s (NSDQ:CNMD) $1 million in profits would have turned to an $8 million loss; SonoSite’s (NSDQ: SONO) $1 million bottom line would have swung to a $3 million loss; and Symmetry Medical’s (NYSE:SMA) $3 million profit would have instead been a $3 million loss.

Bloomberg Government takes on AdvaMed’s report

Industry lobby AdvaMed issued its own analysis of the medical device tax last September, focusing on overall impacts to the industry. According to the study’s authors, the impending levy represents "the last straw on the camel’s back" for medical device companies trying to thrive in the struggling American economy, all but forcing companies to ship manufacturing overseas.

AdvaMed’s ominous projections got a lot of attention, especially from members of Congress already favorable to the industry, but it also caught the eye of Bloomberg Government analyst Christopher Flavelle, who deemed the entire report "not credible."

AdvaMed’s analysis concluded that the industry directly employs more than 400,000 in the U.S., and that "under reasonable assumptions, the tax could result in job losses in excess of 43,000 and employment compensation losses in excess of $3.5 billion."

The figure came from an economic analysis commissioned by AdvaMed and conducted independently by Diana Furchtgott-Roth, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and Harold Furchtgott-Roth, former chief economist of the House Commerce Committee.

"We are not in a strong economic position," Diana Furchtgott-Roth told media during a September conference call when the report was released. "This is not the right time to impose a new tax."

The threat of 43,000 U.S. jobs lost became a rallying cry among industry supporters protesting the tax, including med-tech advocate Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-Minn.) who cited the figure in a letter, with 74 co-signers, sent to House leaders last month.

Medical device executives and related lobbies also used the estimate liberally, especially as companies such as Zimmer (NYSE:ZMH) and Stryker (NYSE:SYK) began announcing layoffs in efforts to cut costs ahead of the tax. But Bloomberg’s Flavelle cast a wary eye on the industry report, chiding it for exaggerating the impacts of the levy without enough solid evidence.

"AdvaMed’s "reasonable assumptions" conflict with economic research, overstate companies’ incentives to move jobs offshore, and ignore the positive effect of new demand created by the law," Flavelle wrote.

Flavelle’s arguments stemmed from a Bloomberg Government analysis that he also penned entitled "Medical Device Industry Overstates Tax Impact," in which he breaks down the assumptions underlying the AdvaMed report’s projections.

He argues that the study’s authors rely too heavily on hypotheticals that blow the tax’s potential impact out of proportion, especially in regard to the loss in revenue and shift to overseas manufacturing.

The AdvaMed report’s most salient projections include heavy layoffs, closure of U.S. plants in favor of overseas manufacturing, price increases on life-saving medical devices and reduced research & development budgets.

Flavelle concedes that the industry may take some hits, but believes losses in revenue attributable to increased prices may be partially or entirely recouped by the 23 million Americans newly insured under health care reform. He finds the threat of a flight overseas untenable, as "the tax by itself creates no specific financial incentive to move production," and he paints the 43,000 jobs lost estimate as little more than a wild guess.

"This industry, as with any industry, has a responsibility to its shareholders to maximize profits and minimize costs at all times, before the tax and after the tax," Flavelle told MassDevice. "The question isn’t whether there are incentives to cut costs – there are always incentives to cut costs. The question is, what new incentives are created by this tax to move jobs overseas?"

"If it’s more cost-effective for Company X to create devices in some other country, you’ve got to assume from the outside that they would do that in the absence of the tax," he added.

AdvaMed generally dismissed the point as an editorial representing one person’s take on the issue.

"Opinions are like noses," public affairs chief Gary Karr told MassDevice. "Everybody’s got one."

The industry lobby stood beside its study, maintaining that it’s the spirit of its conclusions that matter, not the numbers themselves.

"It’s almost kind of beside the point whether 42,000 is the right figure or 39,000 is the right figure or 10,000 is the right figure or even 8,000," Karr said. "It’s still a lot, that’s our point, not the specific number that it’s likely to be. We are certainly in danger of significant job loss because of the device tax."

"At the end of the day it’s really incontrovertible that the medical device tax is a danger to jobs in the medical device industry – it’s just a question of how much," Karr said. "I think for the people who have already been told that they’re going to be laid off by companies who have already announced that, I think 1 job lost because of the medical device tax is 1 too many."

RSS From Medical Design & Outsourcing

  • Molex delivers ISO 13485-compliant, medical-grade surgical cables from its class 100,000 clean room facility
    Molex, LLC operates a fully ISO 146441-1:1999 Class 8-certified clean room, satisfying strict particulate contamination levels specified by ISO-compliant requirements. Located in Thailand, the facility has less than 100,000 particulates (≥0.5µm) per cubic foot of air and manufactures a variety of ISO 13485-compliant medical cables and surgical cables used in operating theatres, hospitals, laboratories and […]
  • Swept-Source OCT: Patent license agreement between Massachusetts General Hospital and Heidelberg Engineering
    Heidelberg Engineering has entered into a patent license agreement with Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) in Boston. The agreement grants global and exclusive rights to 77 basic patents and patent applications which relate to swept-source OCT technology and its application in ophthalmology. Spectral domain OCT has become indispensable to eye care professionals worldwide to diagnose and […]
  • MIT’s MultiFab presents a stark challenge to incumbent 3D Printer manufacturers’ hardware, software, and business Models
    MIT’s Computational Fabrication Group recently announced the MultiFab, a low-cost 3D printer that can combine up to 10 different resins in one part and also includes a 3D scanning system to identify and fix errors during production. According to Lux Research, these capabilities are rare in commercial 3D printers today due to the manufacturers’ need […]
  • AVX releases Accu-P MP medical grade film chip capacitors for medical devices
    AVX Corporation, a leading manufacturer of passive components and interconnect solutions, has released a new series of thin film chip capacitors specifically designed to meet the demanding performance specifications for implantable medical devices. Delivering extremely tight capacitive tolerances, exceptionally repeatable performance, and remarkably low ESR and high Q at high frequencies—including VHF, UHF, and RF […]
  • RIVANNA commences manufacturing of its Accuro device
    Rivanna Medical announced that it has begun manufacturing its FDA-cleared Accuro device, a handheld and untethered smart-phone-sized device that is designed to guide spinal anesthesia with automated 3D navigation technology in addition to ultrasound imaging of abdominal, musculoskeletal, cardiac and peripheral vascular anatomies. The product will be launched at the ASA annual meeting in San […]
  • FDA seeks public input on Quality Metrics guidance
    by Oliver Wolf, Senior Product Manager, MasterControl In line with the general shift towards risk-driven approaches in the quality management world, FDA is now taking steps towards applying those same principles to its own auditing schedule. At the end of July, the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation […]
  • First ‘Ear Wear’ for Active Adults Debuts with MDHearingAid FIT
    If you’ve burned out your ears with earbuds, headphones or decades of other audio abuse but aren’t ready for your grandmother’s hearing aids, not to worry! The new MDHearingAid FIT gets you back in the game with a tiny, FDA-registered, one-size-fits-most solution that doesn’t block your ear canal like old-fashioned in-the-ear hearing aids. The FIT feels […]
  • CardioGenics enters into manufacturing agreement with Ontario-based Plasticap
    CardioGenics Holdings, developer for the In-Vitro-Diagnostics (“IVD”) testing market, announced that it has entered into a manufacturing agreement with Plasticap of Ontario, Canada, pursuant to which Plasticap will manufacture CardioGenics’ proprietary self-metering cartridges for its QL Care analyzer. The term of the agreement is three years and the purchase price for each cartridge shall be […]
  • MTD Micro Molding releases micro materials menu
    MTD Micro Molding, a long-time leader in micro-injection molding, has released an updated “Materials Menu” of materials that can be successfully micromolded to help guide engineers at medical device companies. Material selection is a crucial step in product manufacturability. The correct material drives tolerance, dimension, strength, usabality, speed-to-market, design, critical features, and cost. Through MTD’s […]
  • MedTech Chat: Elastic technology for drug delivery
    Dr. Zhen Gu and Dr. Yong Zhu from North Carolina State University are both co-senior authors of a research paper describing their recent work. Dr. Gu, Dr. Zhu and other researchers from North Carolina State University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have developed a drug delivery technology that consists of an […]
  • B. Braun’s OEM Division offers large bore normally closed low-pressure check valves
    Infusion therapy and pain management device manufacturer B. Braun said today it is offering normally closed large-bore low-pressure check valves through its valve-focused contract manufacturing OEM division. The valves, offered by Bethlehem, Pa.-based B. Braun, are designed for the intermittent injection of fluids during medical treatment and open automatically when pressure is applied. The newly […]

Leave a Reply