Chief Medical Editor Message
Taxing News
October 2004
Welcome to our 7th Annual cosmetic Dermatology Issue, in which we’ve gathered a variety of relevant articles and news items that highlight cosmetic dermatology trends, offering you practical insight into these procedures. But although physicians and researchers continue to make inroads into new advances in the field of cosmetic dermatology, cosmetic dermatologists in New Jersey are taking a step backward.
September 1 marked the first day of the new — and much maligned — Cosmetic Medical Procedures Gross Receipts Tax in New Jersey. This 6% tax applies to any elective cosmetic surgery, and it represents the first time that any state has taxed a surgical procedure. Dermatologists, naturally, are concerned that their patients may opt to travel out of state to undergo these procedures and skirt the tax.
In addition to the tax on cosmetic medical procedures, the law also imposes a 3.5% tax on the gross revenue of ambulatory care centers in the state.
According to the description of the tax, it is a 6% gross receipts tax on the purchase of certain “cosmetic procedures.” The document describes cosmetic medical procedures as “medical procedures performed in order to improve the human subject’s appearance without significantly serving to prevent or treat illness or disease or to promote proper functioning of the body.”
Feeling the Effects
“Several patients have expressed disgust not with the physicians but the governor and state legislature,” explains Dr. David Goldberg who is Director of Skin Laser & Surgery Specialists of New York and New Jersey.
Because Dr. Goldberg has offices in both New York and New Jersey, he’s at an advantage.
“Some of my patients are making appointments in the New York office where they don’t have to pay the tax,” he says. “The impact on New Jersey cosmetic surgeons and cosmetic dermatologists who do not have offices in New York becomes obvious,” he adds.
“Patients are outraged,” says Dr. Emil Bisaccia, President of Affiliated Dermatology Cosmetic Surgery Center in Morristown, NJ. “In some cases, they expect the physician to cover the cost.”
This tax presents its own set of problems, according to Dr. Bisaccia.
“Patients we consulted with months ago and had given a fee, we now have to give them a new fee that reflects the 6% increase,” Dr. Bisaccia explains.
And it’s not as if doctors had much warning so they could properly alert their patients. “This law just showed up,” says Dr. Bisaccia. “The governor never had accountants, lawyers or physicians involved in the deliberation or any of the discussion surrounding this bill,” he adds.
“This law is causing an accounting nightmare for physicians who are already burdened by insurance demands,” laments Dr. Bisaccia. “We’re being turned into tax collectors, and we’re not set up that way to do business.”
Welcome to our 7th Annual cosmetic Dermatology Issue, in which we’ve gathered a variety of relevant articles and news items that highlight cosmetic dermatology trends, offering you practical insight into these procedures. But although physicians and researchers continue to make inroads into new advances in the field of cosmetic dermatology, cosmetic dermatologists in New Jersey are taking a step backward.
September 1 marked the first day of the new — and much maligned — Cosmetic Medical Procedures Gross Receipts Tax in New Jersey. This 6% tax applies to any elective cosmetic surgery, and it represents the first time that any state has taxed a surgical procedure. Dermatologists, naturally, are concerned that their patients may opt to travel out of state to undergo these procedures and skirt the tax.
In addition to the tax on cosmetic medical procedures, the law also imposes a 3.5% tax on the gross revenue of ambulatory care centers in the state.
According to the description of the tax, it is a 6% gross receipts tax on the purchase of certain “cosmetic procedures.” The document describes cosmetic medical procedures as “medical procedures performed in order to improve the human subject’s appearance without significantly serving to prevent or treat illness or disease or to promote proper functioning of the body.”
Feeling the Effects
“Several patients have expressed disgust not with the physicians but the governor and state legislature,” explains Dr. David Goldberg who is Director of Skin Laser & Surgery Specialists of New York and New Jersey.
Because Dr. Goldberg has offices in both New York and New Jersey, he’s at an advantage.
“Some of my patients are making appointments in the New York office where they don’t have to pay the tax,” he says. “The impact on New Jersey cosmetic surgeons and cosmetic dermatologists who do not have offices in New York becomes obvious,” he adds.
“Patients are outraged,” says Dr. Emil Bisaccia, President of Affiliated Dermatology Cosmetic Surgery Center in Morristown, NJ. “In some cases, they expect the physician to cover the cost.”
This tax presents its own set of problems, according to Dr. Bisaccia.
“Patients we consulted with months ago and had given a fee, we now have to give them a new fee that reflects the 6% increase,” Dr. Bisaccia explains.
And it’s not as if doctors had much warning so they could properly alert their patients. “This law just showed up,” says Dr. Bisaccia. “The governor never had accountants, lawyers or physicians involved in the deliberation or any of the discussion surrounding this bill,” he adds.
“This law is causing an accounting nightmare for physicians who are already burdened by insurance demands,” laments Dr. Bisaccia. “We’re being turned into tax collectors, and we’re not set up that way to do business.”
Welcome to our 7th Annual cosmetic Dermatology Issue, in which we’ve gathered a variety of relevant articles and news items that highlight cosmetic dermatology trends, offering you practical insight into these procedures. But although physicians and researchers continue to make inroads into new advances in the field of cosmetic dermatology, cosmetic dermatologists in New Jersey are taking a step backward.
September 1 marked the first day of the new — and much maligned — Cosmetic Medical Procedures Gross Receipts Tax in New Jersey. This 6% tax applies to any elective cosmetic surgery, and it represents the first time that any state has taxed a surgical procedure. Dermatologists, naturally, are concerned that their patients may opt to travel out of state to undergo these procedures and skirt the tax.
In addition to the tax on cosmetic medical procedures, the law also imposes a 3.5% tax on the gross revenue of ambulatory care centers in the state.
According to the description of the tax, it is a 6% gross receipts tax on the purchase of certain “cosmetic procedures.” The document describes cosmetic medical procedures as “medical procedures performed in order to improve the human subject’s appearance without significantly serving to prevent or treat illness or disease or to promote proper functioning of the body.”
Feeling the Effects
“Several patients have expressed disgust not with the physicians but the governor and state legislature,” explains Dr. David Goldberg who is Director of Skin Laser & Surgery Specialists of New York and New Jersey.
Because Dr. Goldberg has offices in both New York and New Jersey, he’s at an advantage.
“Some of my patients are making appointments in the New York office where they don’t have to pay the tax,” he says. “The impact on New Jersey cosmetic surgeons and cosmetic dermatologists who do not have offices in New York becomes obvious,” he adds.
“Patients are outraged,” says Dr. Emil Bisaccia, President of Affiliated Dermatology Cosmetic Surgery Center in Morristown, NJ. “In some cases, they expect the physician to cover the cost.”
This tax presents its own set of problems, according to Dr. Bisaccia.
“Patients we consulted with months ago and had given a fee, we now have to give them a new fee that reflects the 6% increase,” Dr. Bisaccia explains.
And it’s not as if doctors had much warning so they could properly alert their patients. “This law just showed up,” says Dr. Bisaccia. “The governor never had accountants, lawyers or physicians involved in the deliberation or any of the discussion surrounding this bill,” he adds.
“This law is causing an accounting nightmare for physicians who are already burdened by insurance demands,” laments Dr. Bisaccia. “We’re being turned into tax collectors, and we’re not set up that way to do business.”
Current Issue
October 2024
Volume 32
Issue 7
Subscribe
The Dermatologist Newsletter
