Ayotte, hospitals settle bitter suit over Medicaid tax scheme
Gov. Kelly Ayotte announced the settlement that Attorney General John Formella's team had negotiated with the New Hampshire Hospital Association, Dartmouth Health and Concord Hospital that all had sued the state over its Medicaid Enhancement Tax (MET) program.
'This agreement is a win for our state, for rural health care access, and, most importantly, for patients,' Ayotte said in a statement.
'I am proud of my team's tireless efforts to reach a deal, and I thank Dartmouth Health, Concord Hospital, and the Hospital Association for coming back to the table to deliver the best possible outcome for everyone.'
This was the third time hospitals had sued over changes to the reimbursement. Two Superior Court judges in the past had ruled the Medicaid tax to be unconstitutional because it's imposed on the state's 26 acute-care hospitals, but not on other providers, such as rehab or day surgery facilities.
As with the previous two suits, hospital executives held further talks with state officials after the suit to reach a deal.
'This agreement is an important step toward ensuring that Dartmouth Health can continue to provide critical care to our patients and communities where and when they need it,' said Dr. Janet Conroy, CEO and president of Dartmouth Health.
'We value our partnership with the state and are grateful for Governor Ayotte's support to reach a resolution. We look forward to continued collaboration in support of a strong, sustainable healthcare system for our patients.'
According to state officials, the agreement is a 'budget neutral solution' that would deliver $1 billion in total payments to hospitals over the next three years, consistent with what hospitals had requested.
In turn, the state would receive $60 million more in benefits compared to previous proposals.
'We are pleased that we were able to reach a settlement agreement with Governor Ayotte that will help strengthen the Medicaid program, support hospitals and other essential providers, and most importantly ensure continued care for the patients and communities who count on our hospitals to be there for them when they are needed most,' said Steven Ahnen, president of the NHHA.
In 1991, the state imposed the Medicaid Enhancement Tax on hospitals to qualify the state for bonus matching grants from the federal government. Under the plan, the state pays back the hospitals for nearly all that they paid out in taxes, often on the same day.
The state received more than $300 million in annual reimbursements from Washington that it must spend on the federal/state Medicaid program.
The Biden administration ordered all states to change the hospital tax and payment arrangements that critics here always called a 'scam.'
Federal officials are requiring states to also make direct payments to the hospitals to receive the qualifying federal help, rather than just impose a tax on hospitals and then pay them back.
Since a 2018 settlement, hospitals, in the aggregate, had received 91% back of what they paid the state.
Former Gov. Chris Sununu last summer directed state officials to lower that reimbursement to 80% and to direct more grants to mental health, substance abuse and federally qualified health care centers that were financially beleaguered.
In her two-year state budget plan offered last February, Ayotte stuck with the 80% model for 2026-27.
Ahnen said this would have given the state $137 million more than it receives currently, while the hospitals would have gotten $70 million less than they do now.
The state's 11 largest hospitals as a group would have lost $100 million, Ahnen said.
To ramp up the pressure for a deal, Dartmouth Health, Concord Hospital and other major hospitals withheld the April 15 tax payment putting at risk the state's ability to generate the bonus federal match.
'We are encouraged that through this agreement with the state of New Hampshire quality, affordable health care will continue to be available to the patients and communities we serve at Concord Hospital Health System,' said Robert P. Steigmeyer, president and CEO of the Concord hospital system.
'We remain committed to working with state leaders to uphold our community-focused, charitable mission — now and for generations to come.'
This deal puts in the rearview mirror some tough rhetoric from Ayotte after the hospitals had filed a suit.
'Unfortunately, the plaintiffs are only focused on driving more money to billion-dollar corporations and have resorted to playing political games and misleading the public,' Ayotte said at the time. 'They should return to the table and come to an agreement that benefits all Granite Staters.'
The 'big beautiful bill' the U.S. House passed by one vote earlier this week to restore Trump tax cuts also would limit such Medicaid Enhancement Taxes to 5%.
This could cost this state and the hospitals each tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue.
Ayotte, a former U.S. senator, told reporters she won't overreact to the House proposal.
'When it's working its way through the process, it's hard to react to what the impact will be on New Hampshire,' Ayotte said.
Many Senate Republicans led by Sen. Josh Hawley of Arkansas have said they would oppose any significant cuts to Medicaid as part of this global federal budget agreement.
What's Next: The House Ways and Means Committee meets Tuesday on legislation (SB 249) that deals with this reimbursement scheme. The panel may decide to amend that bill to include terms of this settlement.
Prospects: Now that all the major parties are on board, the Legislature will follow suit and with some legislation embrace these terms.
klandrigan@unionleader.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
9 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Chicago's safety net hospitals face potential service cuts, layoffs after signing of ‘big, beautiful' tax bill
Christine Mertzelos is trying to avoid having her leg amputated. Twice a week, a hospital van carries her from her home in Wrigleyville to the wound clinic at Humboldt Park Health, where a diabetic ulcer on her ankle is cleaned, treated and dressed. At one point, the ulcer wrapped nearly all the way around her lower leg - a situation that can lead to amputation if not controlled. The ulcer, however, has shrunk significantly. "This place has been a lifesaver for me," said Mertzelos, 61. "Without this clinic I don't know what I would do." She and others, however, are worried they may have to find out in coming years. The recent signing of the "One Big Beautiful Bill" has thrown into question the future of services at safety net hospitals like Humboldt Park Health that care for large numbers of people on Medicaid. The new law will slash an estimated $1 trillion from Medicaid over the next 10 years to help pay for tax cuts and enhanced border and national security, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Humboldt Park Health will likely see an additional $5 million to $7 million in losses annually once the changes go into effect, said CEO Jose Sanchez. The hospital typically has an operating margin of about $1 million annually. "I came in this morning and met with senior leaders and said, 'We've got to begin to think about how do we position ourselves to face the potential cuts we'll have,'" Sanchez said earlier this week. About 75% to 80% of Humboldt Park Health's patients are on Medicaid, and the hospital employs about 1,000 people, he said. "When you absorb the magnitude of those cuts, that means now you are beginning to make a decision of what services you are not going to provide," Sanchez said. "When you eliminate services, you eliminate people as well." As a state, Illinois stands to lose about $48 billion in federal funding for Medicaid over 10 years, according to KFF, a nonprofit organization focused on health policy. More than 330,000 Illinois residents - or nearly 11% of those now on Medicaid - are at risk of losing their health care coverage over the decade, according to Manatt Health, which provides legal and consulting services in health care. New work requirements for certain adults on Medicaid don't go into effect until late December 2026, and major changes to provider taxes - a mechanism states use to help fund their Medicaid programs - won't take effect until fiscal year 2028. But hospitals aren't waiting to start making plans. "Undoubtedly the hospitals can't wait until the policies are fully implemented," said Dr. Ben Sommers, a professor of health policy and economics at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. "They need to start planning now." Patient Maria Fuentes worries about what will happen if Humboldt Park Health has to cut its offerings. Fuentes has been going to the hospital, which was previously called Norwegian American Hospital, for decades, and gave birth to all four of her kids there. "It's my hospital," said Fuentes, 52, of Dunning, as she visited on a recent day for a checkup. Sinai Chicago will also face difficult decisions in coming years as the law's provisions take effect. Sinai, which includes Mount Sinai Hospital on the West Side and Holy Cross Hospital on the South Side, has been running in the red, and about 70% of its patients are on Medicaid, said CEO Dr. Ngozi Ezike. It's too early to say exactly how much money Sinai will lose as a result of the new law, but "going forward there will be services that will have to be adjusted," Ezike said. "There are a lot of things that will have to be looked at, including layoffs, everything that we don't want to do, those are all things that have to be on the table," Ezike said. Cook County Health also expects to take a hit, including a loss of about $88 million a year once the work requirements go into effect, with an estimated 10% of its Medicaid patients potentially losing coverage, said CEO Dr. Erik Mikaitis. Many people are expected to lose Medicaid not because they don't qualify, but because of increased paperwork-related challenges. Cook County Health isn't planning on any layoffs or service changes for now, as it works through a projected budget gap for 2026, Mikaitis said. But in coming years, "the more that things happen, the more likely there may be a time we'll have to make difficult decisions," Mikaitis said. Mostly, he worries about how the new law will affect patients who may lose their health coverage. "As people lose coverage they stop engaging in preventative care, and instead of seeing patients in the office to manage blood pressure and diabetes, we're going to see them in the emergency room to manage strokes and heart attacks," Mikaitis said. Lurie Children's Hospital also sees potential trouble ahead. About half of Lurie Children's Hospital's patients are on Medicaid. Though those patients are children and won't be subject to work requirements, hospital leaders worry about how other cuts to federal Medicaid dollars for Illinois might affect its offerings. The hospital is already limited by the gap between what Medicaid reimburses it for services versus what that care actually costs to provide, said Lurie CEO Dr. Tom Shanley. The question, he said, is, "Are we going to be able to continue the degree of the services we have today as we move forward?" As Mertzelos finished her treatment at Humboldt Park Health on a recent day, she wondered aloud what would happen to people like her if the hospital had to cut its offerings. "It literally scares me to hear something like services might be cut because I don't know what I would do," Mertzelos said. Dr. Ann Marie Kulekowskis, who is medical director of the hospital's wound clinic, overheard her. "I don't know what we would all do," the doctor replied. _____ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Wall Street Journal
10 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Democrats' School Choice Dilemma
One of the first rules of partisan politics is to promote issues that unify your own coalition while dividing the other party's. That's why the Medicaid cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act are a gift to Democrats. Over the past 15 years, 40 states opted for Medicaid expansion, including 20 that Trump won in 2024; lots of Republican governors proved unwilling to turn down an offer that had Uncle Sam paying 90% of the costs. Congressional Republicans have reversed much of ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion and thereby handed Democrats an election issue. With much less notice, the act created a school-choice program that poses a headache for elected Democrats. It provides a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for individual taxpayers who donate up to $1,700 annually to 'scholarship granting organizations,' which give money to students to cover private-school tuition and other education expenses.
The Hill
11 hours ago
- The Hill
Hospitals across nation brace for Medicaid cuts under ‘big, beautiful' law
Hospitals are bracing for the impact from the Medicaid cuts in President Trump's sweeping spending and tax cut law. While most of the cuts won't happen immediately, rural facilities in particular say they likely will have to make difficult financial decisions about which services they can afford to keep and which may need to be cut. Hospitals loudly raised alarms about the legislation, but their warnings went unheeded, and now they say they will bear the brunt of the changes. The new law cuts about $1 trillion from Medicaid, primarily through stringent work requirements as well as reductions to how states can fund their Medicaid programs through provider taxes and state directed payments. Rural hospitals rely heavily on Medicaid funding because many of the patients they care for are low income. 'Restrictions on state directed payments and provider taxes cut off critical financial lifelines for hospitals,' Bruce Siegel, president and CEO of America's Essential Hospitals said in a statement. 'State directed payments are a critical source of support for hospitals, particularly in rural areas, and provider taxes help reduce the gap between Medicaid and other payers, ensuring that physicians can take Medicaid patients and hospitals can be adequately staffed. Cutting these lifelines is not sustainable, and it will harm patients.' More than 300 rural hospitals in the U.S. are at risk of closing down because of the bill, according to research conducted by the University of North Carolina's Sheps Center for Health Services Research and released last month by Democratic lawmakers. Rural hospitals already operate on thin margins. The law's Medicaid cuts will lead to more uninsured patients, meaning rural hospitals will not get paid for the services they are required by law to provide to patients, according to the report. In turn, they will face deeper financial strain. Medicaid-dependent services — like labor and delivery units, mental health care, and emergency rooms — are some of the least profitable, yet most essential, services that hospitals provide. But experts said those will likely be cut as hospitals try to stay afloat. In rural communities, Medicaid covers nearly half of all births and one-fifth of inpatient discharges, according to health research group KFF. Republicans pushed back the start date for the provider tax reductions until 2028, and they won't be fully phased in until 2031. The bill was only signed into law on July 4, so hospitals said it's too early for them to know specifics on which services they'll have to cut back on. But the discussions are underway because hospitals need to start planning. 'If they see a very negative outlook in terms of Medicaid revenue reductions, increases in uncompensated care costs, I think that will tip the scales towards cutting services, cutting staff, not hiring, not expanding,' said Edwin Park, a research professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Mark Nantz, president and chief executive officer of Valley Health System, oversees a network that includes six hospitals in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and West Virginia, ranging from a 495-bed regional facility in Winchester to a 36-bed facility in Front Royal, about 70 miles outside of Washington. Nantz said Medicaid expansion and provider taxes have allowed the system to break even when taking care of Medicaid patients. Previously, they were losing about 25 cents on every dollar. Once the cuts are fully phased in, Nantz said Valley Health will lose about $50 million a year in revenue for Medicaid patients. The most likely casualty will be new construction and expansion plans, but he said it's too early to know more. 'We're not in a situation where we need to knee-jerk because we're a pretty stable healthcare system, but it's definitely going to change the way we look at expanding and the types of services that we offer in our six hospitals,' Nantz said. Valley Health was able to expand the services it offers because it was not losing money on Medicaid, but that may not be able to continue. While hospitals may not close, some types of specialty care may be moved from rural facilities and centralized at the regional facility. 'We've got, really, two and a half to three years to make those kinds of decisions and prepare for what we will do. So we're not threatening to cut jobs or hospitals or service locations or any of that right now,' Nantz said, 'but we have to look at whether or not we can continue' offering the same types of services. Republicans concerned about the impact of the provider tax reduction on rural hospitals inserted a $50 billion relief fund into the law. The law calls for the money to be distributed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) over five years. The federal government will distribute half of the program's $50 billion allotment equally among all states with an approved application over the next five years. But experts said the money isn't nearly enough to make up for the impact of the cuts. According to a KFF analysis, federal Medicaid spending in rural areas is estimated to decline by $155 billion over a decade. The states and hospitals that will be hit the hardest will benefit the least, Park said. He noted the law gives the Trump administration a lot of discretion on how they divide up the funds, so there's potential for favoritism. Every state has until the end of 2025 at the latest to apply for funds by submitting a 'detailed rural health transformation plan' that addresses the program's aims, according to the legislation. But if CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz doesn't agree with how states are using their funds, the law says he then 'may withhold payments to, or reduce payments to, or recover previous payments from, the State.' 'It's a fig leaf,' Park said. 'The fund is temporary. These cuts are permanent.'
