Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves amendment asking AHS and Department of Taxes to study funding Blueprint via claims tax
Summary
A legislative committee voted 11-0 to approve an amendment to S197 directing the Agency of Human Services, in consultation with the Department of Taxes, to recommend by Jan. 15 how Blueprint funding could transition to a health care claims tax, including any necessary tax-rate changes and an implementation timeline.
A legislative committee on May 20 reviewed and approved an amendment to S197 that asks the Agency of Human Services, working with the Department of Taxes, to recommend how funding for the Blueprint could be transitioned to a health care claims tax.
Nolan, who walked members through draft 2.2, said the amendment moves responsibility for evaluating the claims tax away from the Blueprint steering committee to AHS and the Department of Taxes because “that group is not the right group that should be looking at claims tax.” Jen Carbiano of the Legislative Council summarized the amendment as technical edits plus a new Section 3a directing the agency to produce recommendations by Jan. 15 that include any modifications to existing claims-tax rates and a potential timeline for implementation.
Committee members asked how revenue from the claims tax is currently allocated and whether shifting Blueprint funding would affect the general fund. One member cited an estimated revenue figure of about $36,000,000; Nolan and others noted portions of the existing claims tax flow to a health information technology fund (a stated percentage in the transcript) with the remainder going to broader funds, and that any move to use the claims tax to fund Blueprint would require decisions about reallocating those percentages and possibly increasing the tax rate.
Members also debated whether the amendment should ask AHS to estimate how the claims tax might support public financing of universal primary care. A committee member argued that including universal primary care costing could be calculated from the same data; Jen Carbiano replied that the agency would first need a cost estimate for universal primary care before it could determine required tax rates.
Because the bill could reach the floor soon, members generally agreed not to add broader instructions before floor action so as not to complicate the amendment. The chair then called a show-of-hands vote, and the committee recorded 11 yes, 0 no, 0 abstentions to approve the amendment for the floor.
The amendment requires AHS, in consultation with the Department of Taxes, to return recommendations by Jan. 15; the committee did not adopt any additional language on universal primary care costing and left further amendments to be considered later if members choose to amend the bill on the floor.
