Here are four takeaways:
1. Charleston, S.C.-based Roper St. Francis had successfully argued before a lower administrative law court that the prosthetic devices shouldn’t be subject to sales tax because they are sold by prescription.
2. The state Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the lower court’s ruling does not indicate how much money the state stands to generate in new sales tax revenue.
3. Andy Lyons, a spokesman for Roper St. Francis, said the hospital system has paid sales tax on these orthopedic devices all along, and projected that if the Supreme Court had ruled in the system’s favor, it would have saved about $1 million a year.
4. Mr. Lyons said Roper St. Francis has not decided yet if it will appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
More articles on devices and implants:
AxioMed patient runs Boston marathon post-total disc replacement: 4 takeaways
iFuse improvements sustained 2 years post-op: 5 insights from new trial
Stryker’s net earnings up 79.5%; Orthopedics sales reach $1.1B: 9 key notes on Q1 2016
At the Becker's 23rd Annual Spine, Orthopedic and Pain Management-Driven ASC + The Future of Spine Conference, taking place June 11-13 in Chicago, spine surgeons, orthopedic leaders and ASC executives will come together to explore minimally invasive techniques, ASC growth strategies and innovations shaping the future of outpatient spine care. Apply for complimentary registration now.
