Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.


Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
Email Format


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Red Mass Group on Facebook



About Us
FAQ
How To Format Posts
Email Us
RSS Feed
RMG Store
Fair Use Policy
2010 Tag Standards
2010 Candidate Profiles RMG Mobile Site

Search




Advanced Search


Event Calendar
June 2013
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * * * * 01
02 03 04 05 06 07 08
09 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Blog Roll
Mass. Conservatives
Ben Wetmore
Boston Maggie
Conservative's Conscience
The Capitol View Live
Critical Mass
Deval Patrick Watch
FreeRepublic - Massachusetts
Hub Politics
Mass Roots
Miss Kelly
New England Republican
No Looking Backwards
Notes from D.R. Tucker
Peter Porcupine
Save WRKO
Scaling the Hill
South Shore Republican Voice
Worcester Freedom Trail
Moonbats
Blue Mass Group
Berkshires Blog
Chimes at Midnight
Left in Lowell
MA lefty blogs
Progressive Mass.
Quriltai on the Shore
Libertarians
Garrett Quinn
Beacon Hill Institute Blog
Pioneer Institute Blog
Campaign For Liberty
Cato at Liberty
Humble Libertarian
von Mises Blog
Ayn Rand Institue
Young Americans for Liberty
Hyper Local
My Dedham
Dracut Forum
Dracut Musings
Holyoke First
Hub Blog
ShrewsBuried
Talking Stoneham
Universal Hub
View From Plymouth Rock
Eric Dahlberg's Blog
Mass. Media
Conservative's Conscience
The Daily Briefing
Keller @ Large Blog
Ken Pittman
The Lone Republican
Political Intelligence
Pundit Review
Talking Politics
Commonwealth Unbound
Dan Kennedy
Greater Boston
Michael Graham
National
73 Wire
Ace of Spades
Big Hollywood
Daily Beast
Daily Kos
Daily Paul
Flynn Files
Hot Air
Little Green Footballs
National Review
Pardon My English
Reason - Hit & Run
Red State
Sudden Stop
Wonkette





A Letter to Professor Warren on the Medical Device Tax

by: State Rep Jay Barrows

Mon Jul 16, 2012 at 11:01:32 AM EDT


( - promoted by Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno)

Below is a copy of a letter sent to Professor Elizabeth Warren this morning from myself and fellow State Representaive Elizabeth Poirier.  We are calling on Ms. Warren to speak up for  Massachusetts medical device companies by calling on her party's leaders for a repeal of the 2.3% Medical Device Excise Tax set to take effect in January 2013.  It is our hope that Ms. Warren lends her voice and joins Senator Scott Brown in fighting to keep the Massachusetts economy strong.

State Representative Jay Barrows
1st Bristol District
PO Box 57, Foxborough, MA  02035
State Representative Elizabeth Poirier
14th Bristol District
53 Ledgebrook Dr, North Attleborough, MA  02766

Monday, July 16, 2012

Professor Elizabeth Warren
Elizabeth Warren For Senate
5 Middlesex Ave, First Floor
Somerville, MA 02145

Dear Professor Warren,

We write to you today to express our grave concern about the future of an industry here in Massachusetts that is critical to our economy. As you know, our state is home to more than 400 medical device companies that employ more than 25,000 people directly and are responsible for 80,000 other jobs in related industries.  Two major companies are located within the communities we are privileged to serve and we have witnessed first-hand the positive economic impact they have made in our area.  

Right now, the medical device community is a thriving and growing industry, but the threat of the looming 2.3% excise tax set to take effect in January 2013 as part of the federal health care legislation imperils our future. Simply put, this tax would be a jobs-killer, and our industry cannot afford it.   In many cases, this tax would wipe out the entire net profit, forcing companies to cut back, lay people off and prevent future hiring.

There have been multiple efforts by Congress to repeal this tax, but unfortunately obstructionism in Washington has prevented progress on this front. Just last week, your party's leadership in the United State Senate blocked the latest attempt to repeal this job-killing tax.

Although we were heartened to learn in April that you would join Sen. Scott Brown supporting repeal of this tax, your silence since then has been deafening. Worse, you have outright declared that we need to "move on" from this debate. That is hardly the leadership Massachusetts businesses and employees in the medical device space expect from their would-be senator, and it is a startling statement coming from someone who seeks to represent Massachusetts interests in Washington, D.C.  There is much more you can and should do.  

In the immediate term,we urge you to publicly intervene with your party's leadership and encourage them to allow the repeal of this job-killer to come before the Senate where it can receive a fair up or down vote.  In the event that effort fails, we would urge you to reverse course from your stated intention to "move on," and instead declare that you will make it your mission - as Sen. Brown has made it his - to stand up for Massachusetts and continue the fight to repeal of this unfair, job destroying tax that targets an industry so important to our state.  

The failure of Congress to act before January would be devastating for the future medical manufacturing industry and the Massachusetts economy. As your party's nominee for Senate, you have a responsibility to stand up for your state's interests and do everything in your power to prevent this tax from becoming law.  It's the least we can expect from someone who wants to make it their full-time job to represent the Commonwealth in the Senate.

We call on you to join Senator Brown, many of our colleagues in the House of Representatives and, most importantly, Massachusetts medical device companies and their hard-working employees in fighting to keep the Commonwealth economy strong and open for business.

Thank you for your attention to this very important matter. We look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Representative F. Jay Barrows, 1st Bristol
Representative Elizabeth Poirier, 14th Bristol

State Rep Jay Barrows :: A Letter to Professor Warren on the Medical Device Tax
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

I agree with the premise, but........ (0.00 / 0)
Do we really have medical device companies in Massachusetts that would have their entire net profit wiped out due to a 2.3% tax on their product?  I ask only because I am unaware of one.

Do these same medical device companies get 'manufacturing' tax breaks/cedits?  It seems kind of ironic that we offer a tax break in one sense - and turn around and tax them somewhere else.  

I too think the tax ought to go away as it will cost jobs, and will increase the cost of medical care in the USA.  

Ed Markey is now the official 'cheapest' man on earth.  1.5 percent to charity while the average American gave 3 times as much...


Who is going to not buy it because it's 2.3% more? (5.00 / 1)
' In many cases, this tax would wipe out the entire net profit, forcing companies to cut back, lay people off and prevent future hiring."

So the tax is paid by the company, not by the patient? That does seem backward, it should be paid by the patient, and it should be more like 10%. But 2.3% is a start. No one is going to refuse their pacemaker because it's a little more expensive, if they could afford it at $2,000 they can afford it at $2,046. They already pay whatever it costs, which is why the insurance rates are going up up up and there aren't enough resources for standard medical care that doesn't involve selling to expensive new piece of hardware. So now they'd at least be subsidizing standard medicine instead of driving up the cost.


[ Parent ]
I thought the same thing John..... (0.00 / 0)
Is the company really going to take the hit for a 2.3% tax on their items?  Not in this lifetime....

It gets passed on to the customer/insurance company...

Ed Markey is now the official 'cheapest' man on earth.  1.5 percent to charity while the average American gave 3 times as much...


[ Parent ]
It will get passed on to the (0.00 / 0)
device company's customers. Which in some cases could be our local EMT/Fire stations. Most likely it will be doctors' offices and hospitals. They, in turn, will raise their prices to reflect their increased costs. The result will be the same though, higher health care costs and/or a decline in device advancements.

And if device companies face a decline in revenue because of slower sales due to higher prices, jobs will be cut.

How's the saying go, "The more you tax something, the less you get of it."?

G.O.P. Growth. Opportunity. Prosperity. For all Americans.

Karl (TLC)Weld


[ Parent ]
One or the other (0.00 / 0)
If device companies face a decline in sales then that means lower health care costs, because we'd be buying fewer devices. But that won't happen because there would only be one customer in a million for whom the extra 2.3% makes it too expensive all of a sudden.

Face it, you guys want the device makers to be subsidized even more than they already are, you want all the device makers and transhumanist researchers to be given free blow jobs if that's what they want, even if it bankrupts the country and leaves poor people without simple medical care.


[ Parent ]
Poor people (0.00 / 0)
can't get simple medical care because POLITICIANS keep mandating what insurance companies have to offer in "basic" plans to be allowed to sell in a particular marketplace. Do you think insurance companies WANT to include the latest gadget or procedure that a very small population will ever end up using in their basic plans? If they could offer a basic plan for catastrophic coverage with the customer paying out-of-pocket for things not in the basic plan they would. Government intervention in the marketplace, making the majority (a larger pool of customers) pay for services they will NEVER use is how they subsidize the costs for the minority who will.

G.O.P. Growth. Opportunity. Prosperity. For all Americans.

Karl (TLC)Weld


[ Parent ]
Not just "Politicians" (0.00 / 0)
Specifically, they are feminist transhumanist politicians who want to subsidize technology and devices more than mundane medical care. There are politicians who oppose them and stand up to the medical device makers and Big Pharma, and this tax is one of the rare times when they might prevail.

I think there is a role for government in regulating the coverage of insurance plans so that people don't get suckered and screwed over because the plan they bought doesn't cover some normal treatable disease or condition. We shouldn't have to read the fine print or calculate the likelihood of getting leukemia versus having a heart attack or falling down the stairs, all those things should be covered for everyone. But some extraordinary treatments and discretionary treatments should be left for the rich to spend their own money on, and they should also pay an extra tax for the cost of pushing the standard of care up higher and higher.


[ Parent ]
....and when (0.00 / 0)
jobs are cut, income taxes are cut....furthering the supposed revenue problem.

"I acknowledge having racist and classist and sexist feelings of white male superiority." -John Howard

[ Parent ]
Medicare/Medicaid - pay a fixed $ per device (0.00 / 0)
This won't go up - so the 2.3% will come off the top of these medical product companies.

Gross revenue taxes - stink - even if you are losing money you pay them - it will force some companies on the margin out of business.

So think of it this way - a small medical product company has 10M in sales - they will pay 300K in gross revenue taxes - I can see this putting them under.


Adverstise here for as low as $60 per week.








Local Feeds 

Stat Counter

 
Red Mass Group is owned and operated by Robert Eno. It is not authorized or paid for by any candidate or committee.
HOME
Powered by: SoapBlox