Community Benefit and Tax-Exemption Levels at Non-Profit Hospitals Across US States.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Medical Care Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-02 DOI:10.1097/MLR.0000000000002064
D August Oddleifson, Huaying Dong, Rishi K Wadhera
{"title":"Community Benefit and Tax-Exemption Levels at Non-Profit Hospitals Across US States.","authors":"D August Oddleifson, Huaying Dong, Rishi K Wadhera","doi":"10.1097/MLR.0000000000002064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the association between state policies and sociodemographic characteristics and state mean fair share spending at non-profit hospitals. Fair share spending is a hospital's charity care and community investment less the estimated value of their tax-exempt status.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Hospitals with non-profit status in the United States are exempt from paying taxes. In return, they are expected to provide community benefits by subsidizing medical care for those who cannot pay and investing in the health and social needs of their community.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a multivariable linear regression model to determine the association of state-level sociodemographics and policies with state-level mean fair share spending in 2019. Fair share spending data was obtained from the Lown Institute.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found no association between the percentage of people living in poverty, in rural areas, or US region and fair share spending. Similarly, there was no association found for state minimum community benefit and reporting requirements. The state percentage of racial/ethnic minorities was associated with higher mean fair share spending [+$1.48 million for every 10% increase (95% CI: 0.01 to 2.96 million)]. Medicaid expansion status was associated with a 6.9-million-dollar decrease (95% CI: -10.4 to -3.3 million).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>State-level community benefit policies have been ineffective at raising community benefit spending to levels comparable to the value of non-profit hospital tax-exempt status.</p>","PeriodicalId":18364,"journal":{"name":"Medical Care","volume":" ","pages":"222-226"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000002064","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the association between state policies and sociodemographic characteristics and state mean fair share spending at non-profit hospitals. Fair share spending is a hospital's charity care and community investment less the estimated value of their tax-exempt status.

Background: Hospitals with non-profit status in the United States are exempt from paying taxes. In return, they are expected to provide community benefits by subsidizing medical care for those who cannot pay and investing in the health and social needs of their community.

Methods: We used a multivariable linear regression model to determine the association of state-level sociodemographics and policies with state-level mean fair share spending in 2019. Fair share spending data was obtained from the Lown Institute.

Results: We found no association between the percentage of people living in poverty, in rural areas, or US region and fair share spending. Similarly, there was no association found for state minimum community benefit and reporting requirements. The state percentage of racial/ethnic minorities was associated with higher mean fair share spending [+$1.48 million for every 10% increase (95% CI: 0.01 to 2.96 million)]. Medicaid expansion status was associated with a 6.9-million-dollar decrease (95% CI: -10.4 to -3.3 million).

Conclusions: State-level community benefit policies have been ineffective at raising community benefit spending to levels comparable to the value of non-profit hospital tax-exempt status.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国各州非营利医院的社区福利和免税水平。
目的评估非营利性医院的州政策和社会人口特征与州平均公平份额支出之间的关联。公平份额支出是指医院的慈善护理和社区投资减去其免税地位的估计价值:背景:在美国,非营利性医院可以免税。作为回报,医院应为无力支付医疗费用的人提供医疗补贴,并为社区的健康和社会需求进行投资,从而为社区提供福利:我们使用多变量线性回归模型来确定州级社会人口统计和政策与 2019 年州级平均公平份额支出的关联。公平份额支出数据来自洛恩研究所:我们发现,贫困人口比例、农村人口比例或美国地区人口比例与公平份额支出之间没有关联。同样,各州的最低社区福利和报告要求也没有关联。少数种族/族裔所占的州比例与更高的平均公平份额支出相关[每增加 10%,就会增加 148 万美元(95% CI:01 万至 296 万美元)]。医疗补助扩展状态与减少 690 万美元(95% CI:-1040 万至-330 万美元)相关:州级社区福利政策未能有效地将社区福利支出提高到与非营利性医院免税地位价值相当的水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Care
Medical Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
228
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Rated as one of the top ten journals in healthcare administration, Medical Care is devoted to all aspects of the administration and delivery of healthcare. This scholarly journal publishes original, peer-reviewed papers documenting the most current developments in the rapidly changing field of healthcare. This timely journal reports on the findings of original investigations into issues related to the research, planning, organization, financing, provision, and evaluation of health services.
期刊最新文献
Community Benefit and Tax-Exemption Levels at Non-Profit Hospitals Across US States. Using Z Codes to Document Social Risk Factors in the Electronic Health Record: A Scoping Review. Comparison of Alternative Approaches to Using Race-and-Ethnicity Data in Estimating Differences in Health Care and Social Determinants of Health. Facility-Level Differences in Antipsychotic Drug Use: Impact on Quality Outcomes for Nursing Home Residents. Knowledge of Medical Interpretation Rights Among Individuals With Non-English Language Preference: A Cross-Sectional Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1