Paragon Health Institute continues their series of misguided and harmful characterizations of Medicaid financing and provider payment, including through two reports “Addressing Medicaid Money Laundering: The Lack of Integrity with Medicaid Financing and the Need for Reform” and “California’s Insurance-Tax Shuffle: How Federal Money Ends Up Paying for Medicaid for Illegal Immigrants.” The timing of this series of reports aligns with the efforts of some policymakers in Congress to further limit states’ ability to finance their Medicaid programs to fund tax cuts for the wealthy.
In their reports, Paragon recommends that Congress pursue several policies that are ultimately harmful to patients and providers, targeting specific state Medicaid programs, such as those in California, North Carolina, Arizona, and Tennessee, without adequate justification. The policies Paragon recommends include:
Eliminating or Reducing Provider Taxes. Provider taxes are a legitimate financing method used by 49 states and the District of Columbia to fund a portion of the non-federal share of their Medicaid programs. There are federal limits, overseen by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), including a 6% tax safe harbor threshold. Eliminating provider taxes or reducing the safe harbor threshold likely would result in shifting the tax burden to state residents through higher income taxes, property taxes, sales tax or other state tax structures. Specifically:
Eliminating or Capping State-Directed Payments (SDPs). Medicaid MCOs’ low provider payments have created the need for additional provider support through state-directed payments, particularly for hospitals that serve disproportionately high rates of Medicaid and other public-payer patients and routinely operate with negative margins. Today, as many SDP programs await approval, some hospitals are already making difficult decisions to cut their workforce, struggling to make payroll and fighting to maintain service lines or stay open entirely amid further financial instability. For example:
What most people don’t realize is that cutting provider taxes and directed payments wouldn’t just impact Medicaid patients and providers; it would limit access to care for everyone.
Cutting provider taxes and supplemental payments would worsen the already significant gap between Medicaid reimbursement and the actual cost of providing care to Medicaid patients. In Florida, for example, with directed payments factored in, which are in part financed through provider taxes, Medicaid pays $0.68 for every dollar spent on care. Without these additional payments, reimbursement would drop to $0.48 for each dollar spent on Medicaid beneficiaries. In California, Medicaid pays $0.80 for every dollar spent on care. Without the additional payments financed by California’s provider tax arrangement, payment would decrease to just $0.70 for each dollar spent on Medicaid patients. In the context of specific services, hospitals experienced a -42% Medicaid margin for inpatient obstetrics care and a -44.9% Medicaid margin for outpatient obstetrics care in 2023. The Medicaid shortfall faced by providers is directly linked to the services and sites of care that they can offer to all patients.
Cutting off the financing for a program that is the single largest source of health care coverage in the U.S., while harming providers and patients, is hardly reform. We discourage anyone from trusting attacks on state Medicaid programs that call for unjustifiable federal funding cuts to Medicaid at the expense of Medicaid patients and our communities as a way to finance tax cuts for the wealthy.
We urge Congress to reject cuts to vital Medicaid financing methods, including provider taxes and state-directed payments.