Like many other industries, makers of medical devices are reeling from the anticipated effects of US healthcare reform. But, unlike other businesses, which might only have a faint idea of what the coming changes mean, medical device companies have a concrete notion of the future effects on their revenue, namely a 2.3% excise tax that starts in 2013. That burden could spell trouble for research and development of medical devices in the US, according to experts.

The tax, which was signed into law in late March as part of the healthcare reform bill, is expected to raise $20 billion over the course of a decade. And because the 2.3% is an excise tax, purchasers of medical devices—including hospitals, doctors and researchers—can indeed expect at least some of that money to come out of their pockets as prices go up.

“It's likely going to end up split between companies, with what the excise tax means for price varying from product to product and company to company,” says David Nexon, senior executive vice president for AdvaMed, the Advanced Medical Technology Association.

Of greater concern to medical device makers will be how the tax affects their bottom line. Although companies with less than $5 million in revenue each year will be exempt, small companies just above that threshold could be hurt the most. An analysis by MassDevice, the Massachusetts Medical Devices Journal, estimated that some small companies could have their profits cut by as much as half, whereas companies in the red could go even further downhill.

According to Mark Leahey, president of the Medical Device Manufacturers Association (MDMA), which represents about 250 small- and medium-sized companies, lost profits could mean one or a combination of four things: shutting down entirely, a reduction in overall staff, outsourcing to other countries, and cutting the research and development budget, which Leahey says will be the “lion's share” of changes.

Nexon agrees, noting how “cutting R&D hurts less than cutting staff.” And as large companies will merely trim their budgets, it's likely that the smaller companies, many of them focused on innovation, will go under entirely. Leahey says that MDMA and other groups will work together to ensure that individual companies keep their footing. Talks are also ongoing in Washington, DC to pursue a new bill that would soften the tax burden for developing companies, for example by exempting their first $100 million in sales.

Those sales, however, might not go up significantly because of healthcare reform. Leahey notes that whereas other industries also being taxed are likely to benefit in the long term from new patients—pharmaceutical and insurance companies, for example—medical devices “are used whether or not someone has insurance.” Massachusetts, after its own health care reform in 2006, had “no noticeable uptick” in sales, according to Leahey.

However individual companies pan out stateside, the US medical device industry as a whole will be wary of its global standing once 2013 rolls around.

“The US has been dominant in this industry for years, and we'd like to stay that way,” Nexon says. “India, China and Brazil have all been making investments into the medical device industry, so the tax is likely going to be bad for our standing in the long term. How bad, however, is hard to quantify.”