The Medical Device Excise Tax—Over Before It Begins? (Reply)

Kramer DB, Kesselheim AS - New England Journal of Medicine

  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence

Summary:

In this exchange, industry representatives challeng the authors’ analysis of the ACA’s 2.3% medical device excise tax, claiming it has already caused job losses, reduced R&D spending, and will not generate the predicted revenue benefits. The authors reply that they remain skeptical of industry’s anecdotal claims, note that imaging utilization data from Massachusetts do not support the critics’ conclusions due to confounding factors.

VIEW SOURCE

Recent Work from PORTAL

Talk bubble graphics representing commentary and opinion.

How Congress Can Fix Expert Advisory Committees

Daval CJR, Kesselheim AS - STAT

  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence
Simple graphic of magnifying glass examining papers to signify reviewing research publications.

International Regulatory Status and Reimbursement Recommendations of Haematological Malignancy Drugs Withdrawn from the FDA Accelerated Approval Pathway

Mulsant SS, Kesselheim AS, Naci H - Journal of Cancer Policy

  • Price, Value, and Access
  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence
Talk bubble graphics representing commentary and opinion.

The Impact of Semantics in Medicines Regulation

Costa E, Kesselheim AS - Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics

  • Innovation Incentives and Competition
  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence