OBJECTIVE: This commentary discusses the New Zealand Labour Party\'s announcement to remove tax on fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables. It aims to explore its potential impact on the psychological well-being of New Zealanders in the context of the growing global burden of mental illnesses in the current food environment.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed tax exemption on fruits and vegetables demonstrates the government\'s commitment to improving the food environment. While the precise mental health effects of this potential tax change remain unstudied, existing evidence suggests a positive impact on New Zealanders\' well-being, marking a pivotal step in addressing broader health issues and fostering a healthier, more equitable food landscape.

Significant debate persists about the obligations of nonprofit hospitals toward low-income patients. Many issues pertaining to this subject were discussed during the rulemaking process following the passage of the Affordable Care Act of 2010, which set forth rules for hospital billing and collection. In public comments, hospitals, debt collectors, and patient advocates debated what constituted \"reasonable efforts\" to determine whether a patient qualified for hospital financial assistance before resorting to extraordinary collection actions including lawsuits, wage garnishments, and adverse credit reporting. This study analyzes public comments to the proposed Internal Revenue Service rule on section 501(r)(6). After an initial review of the data, 5 commonly mentioned issues were identified. Respondents were organized into commenter types, and the opinion of each respondent to each issue was coded by 2 separate reviewers. Discrepancies between reviewer determinations were resolved by consensus during follow-up discussions. This analysis revealed a set of common concerns: whether reporting delinquent medical debt to credit bureaus and selling debt to third party buyers should be considered extraordinary collection actions; whether hospitals should be able to use presumptive eligibility to rule patients either eligible or ineligible for financial assistance; and whether hospitals should be held legally liable for the actions of third-party debt collectors. Hospitals and debt collection agencies were allied on most issues, particularly in their shared belief that reporting debt to credit bureaus and selling debt to third parties should not be tightly regulated. Patient advocacy organizations and hospitals had divergent opinions on most issues. The alliance of hospitals and debt collectors in advocating for fewer regulations around collections is part of a history of hospital lobbying to maintain tax-exemption with fewer charity care mandates. This alignment helps explain why third-party debt collection agencies, and aggressive collection tactics, have become commonplace in hospital billing.

This Viewpoint discusses regulation of nonprofit hospitals in a way that will advance their charitable purposes without eliminating their tax exemption status.

暂无摘要。

To identify the prevalence of group reporting of hospital community benefit efforts to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and understand hospital and community characteristics associated with this practice.
The study was based on data collected from publicly available community benefit reports from 2010 to 2019, as well as secondary data from the 2020 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Survey. The sample was drawn from the entire nonprofit US hospital population reporting community benefit activities. The analytic plan employed descriptive statistics and bivariate analysis.
The United States.
All data are self-reported by US hospitals, either through the publication of community benefit reports (IRS Form 990 Schedule H) or a response to the AHA Annual Survey.
Analyzed variables include whether a hospital reported its community benefit expenditures individually or as a group member; community benefit spending as a percentage of hospital operating expenses; and whether the hospital was part of a multihospital system, with consideration of hospital and community characteristics.
Between 2010 and 2019, more than 40% of hospitals participated in group reporting, with most doing so consistently. System membership and hospital size were significantly and positively tied to group reporting, with state community benefit policy tied to the lower prevalence of group reporting.
The high prevalence of group reporting limits accountability to communities and restricts an accurate assessment of community benefit expenditures, counter to policy intentions. Stakeholders should consider what modifications to reporting rules could be made to promote transparency and to ensure that the effects of community benefit policies align with intentions.

Policy Points Hospitals address population health needs and patients\' social determinants of health by offering social care services. Tax-exempt hospitals are required to invest in community benefits, including social care services programs, though most community benefits spending is toward unreimbursed health care services. Tax-exempt hospitals offer about 36% more social care services than for-profit hospitals. Among tax-exempt hospitals, those that allocate more resources to community benefits spending offer more types of social care services, but those in states with minimum community benefits spending requirements offer fewer social care services. Policymakers may consider specifically incentivizing community benefits expenditures toward particular social care services, including linking tax exemptions to implementation, utilization, and outcome targets, to more directly help patients.
Despite growing interest in identifying patients\' social needs, little is known about hospitals\' provision of services to address them. We identify social care services offered by US hospitals and determine whether hospital spending or state policies toward community benefits are associated with the provision of these services by tax-exempt hospitals.
National secondary data about hospitals were collected from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, with additional Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form 990 data on community benefits spending from CommunityBenefitInsight.org and state-level community benefits policies from HilltopInstitute.org. Descriptive statistics for types of social care services and hospital characteristics were calculated, with bivariate chi-square and t-tests comparing for-profit and tax-exempt hospitals. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to estimate associations between hospital characteristics and types of services offered and among tax-exempt hospitals to estimate associations between social care services and community benefits spending and policies. Multivariable logistic regressions modeled associations between community benefits spending/policies and each type of social care services.
Private US hospitals offered an average of 5.7 types of social care services in 2018. Tax-exempt hospitals offered about 36% more social care services than for-profit hospitals. Larger number of beds, health system affiliation, and having community partnerships are associated with more social care services, whereas rural hospitals and those managed under contract offered fewer social care services. Among tax-exempt hospitals, greater community benefits spending is associated with offering more total (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.10, p < 0.01) and patient-focused social care services (IRR = 1.16, p < 0.01). Hospitals in states with minimum community benefits spending requirements offered significantly fewer social care services.
Although tax-exempt status and increased community benefits spending were associated with increased social care services provision, the observation that certain hospital characteristics and state minimum community benefits spending requirements were associated with fewer social care services suggests opportunities for policy reform to increase social care services implementation.

We examined the variation in community benefit and charity care reporting standards mandated by states to determine whether state-mandated community benefit and charity care reporting is associated with greater provision of these services.
We used 2011-2019 data from IRS Form 990 Schedule H for 1,423 nonprofit hospitals to create a sample of 12,807 total observations. Random effects regression models were used to examine the association between state reporting requirements and community benefit spending by nonprofit hospitals. Specific reporting requirements were analyzed to determine whether certain requirements were associated with increased spending on these services.
Nonprofit hospitals in states that required reports spent a higher percentage of total hospital expenditures on community benefits (9.1%, SD = 6.2%) compared to states without these requirements (7.2%, SD = 5.7%). A similar association between the percentage of charity care and total hospital expenditures (2.3% and 1.5%) was found. The greater number of reporting requirements was associated with lower levels of charity care provision, as hospitals allocated more resources to other community benefits.
Mandating the reporting of specific services is associated with greater provision of certain specific services, but not all. A concern is that when many services must be reported, the provision of charity care might be reduced as hospitals choose to allocate their community benefit dollars to other categories. As a result, policymakers may want to focus their attention on the services they most want to prioritize.

As part of their annual tax report, nonprofit hospitals are asked to report their community-building activities (CBAs); yet, little is known to date about hospitals\' spending on such activities. CBAs are activities that improve community health by addressing the upstream factors and social determinants that impact health. Using data from Internal Revenue Service Form 990 Schedule H, this study used descriptive statistics to examine trends in the provision of CBAs by nonprofit hospitals between 2010 and 2019. While the number of hospitals reporting any CBA spending remained relatively stable at around 60%, the share of total operating expenditures that hospitals contributed to CBAs decreased from 0.04% in 2010 to 0.02% in 2019. Despite the increasing attention paid by policy makers and the public to the contributions that hospitals make to the health of their communities, nonprofit hospitals have not made corresponding efforts to increase their spending on CBAs.

Non-profit hospitals are expected to provide charity care and other community benefits to adjust their tax exemption status. Using the Medicare Hospital Cost Report, American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the American Community Survey datasets, we examined if church-affiliated hospitals spent more on charity care and community benefit. For this analysis, we defined five main categories of community benefits were measured: total community benefit; charity care; Medicaid shortfall; unreimbursed other means-tested services; and the total of unreimbursed education and unfunded research. Multiple regression was used to examine the effect of church ownership, controlling for other factors, on the level of community benefit in 2644 general acute care non-profit hospitals. Descriptive analyses and multiple regression were used to show the relationship between the provision of community benefits and church affiliation including Catholic (CH), other church-affiliated hospitals (OCAH), and non-church affiliated hospitals (NCAH). The non-profit hospital on average spent 6.5% of its total expenses on community benefits. NCAH spent 6.09%, CH spent 7.5%, and OCAH spent 9.4%. Non-profits spent 2.8% of their total expenses on charity care, with the highest charity care spending for OCAH (5.2%), followed by CH (3.9%), and NCAH (2.4%). Regression results showed that CH and OCAH, on average, spent 1.08% and 2.16% more on community benefits than NCAHs. In addition, CH and OCAH spent more on other categories of community benefits except for education and research. Church-affiliated hospitals spend more on community benefits and charity care than non-church affiliated nonprofit hospitals.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) requires nonprofit hospitals to report community benefit spending to justify their nonprofit tax exemption. We examined whether nonprofit hospital acquisitions influence the amount and type community benefit spending. We analyzed 2011-2018 data on urban, nonprofit hospitals. The analysis dataset included 57 hospitals that were acquired and a matched control group. We estimated difference-in-differences specifications to measure the effect of acquisitions on total community benefit spending, and three subcategories - clinical, population health, and other spending types. We found that acquisitions led to decreased population health spending (-$0.32 million, p < 0.01) and other spending categories (-$1.5 million, p < 0.05), but no significant change in total or clinical spending. If the acquirer was located out-of-state, total community benefit spending declined by $2.4 million (p < 0.10). Our findings support the need for community benefit spending to be considered, along with quality, efficiency, and prices, when evaluating the welfare impact of acquisitions.