IRS侧重于医院医生的就业状况。

Health care law newsletter Pub Date : 1995-05-01
S F Hoffman
{"title":"IRS侧重于医院医生的就业状况。","authors":"S F Hoffman","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In view of these serious consequences and the IRS' renewed interest in hospital-based physicians, it is imperative that all hospitals examine their contractual relationships with physicians under the foregoing standards to ascertain whether any physicians are improperly being characterized as independent contractors. Of particular concern are arrangements with aspects similar to those in TAM 9443002. Hospitals operating in states that still prohibit the employment of physicians are not necessarily protected, as the IRS does not accept the corporate practice of medicine doctrine as a defense to characterization of physicians as employees for tax purposes. In those states, it is probably best to handle problematic situations through the use of professional corporations, as discussed above.</p>","PeriodicalId":79604,"journal":{"name":"Health care law newsletter","volume":"10 5","pages":"3-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"IRS focuses on employment status of hospital-based physicians.\",\"authors\":\"S F Hoffman\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In view of these serious consequences and the IRS' renewed interest in hospital-based physicians, it is imperative that all hospitals examine their contractual relationships with physicians under the foregoing standards to ascertain whether any physicians are improperly being characterized as independent contractors. Of particular concern are arrangements with aspects similar to those in TAM 9443002. Hospitals operating in states that still prohibit the employment of physicians are not necessarily protected, as the IRS does not accept the corporate practice of medicine doctrine as a defense to characterization of physicians as employees for tax purposes. In those states, it is probably best to handle problematic situations through the use of professional corporations, as discussed above.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health care law newsletter\",\"volume\":\"10 5\",\"pages\":\"3-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1995-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health care law newsletter\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health care law newsletter","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

鉴于这些严重后果以及国税局对医院医生的重新关注,所有医院都必须根据上述标准审查其与医生的合同关系,以确定是否有任何医生被不当地定性为独立承包商。特别值得关注的是与TAM 9443002类似的安排。在仍然禁止雇用医生的州经营的医院不一定受到保护,因为美国国税局不接受将医学学说的企业实践作为将医生定性为雇员的辩护。在这些州,可能最好通过使用专业公司来处理有问题的情况,如上所述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
IRS focuses on employment status of hospital-based physicians.

In view of these serious consequences and the IRS' renewed interest in hospital-based physicians, it is imperative that all hospitals examine their contractual relationships with physicians under the foregoing standards to ascertain whether any physicians are improperly being characterized as independent contractors. Of particular concern are arrangements with aspects similar to those in TAM 9443002. Hospitals operating in states that still prohibit the employment of physicians are not necessarily protected, as the IRS does not accept the corporate practice of medicine doctrine as a defense to characterization of physicians as employees for tax purposes. In those states, it is probably best to handle problematic situations through the use of professional corporations, as discussed above.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
State legislative approaches to regulating the use of genetic information. State Medicaid reform under Section 1115 demonstration authority. Arnett v. Dal Cielo: peer review confidentiality threatened by medical board investigational subpoenas. Commissioner v. Schleier: back to the drawing board on the taxation of employment dispute recoveries. Managed care liability and the capitated provider.
×
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