Moderator ventana Posted February 29, 2012 Moderator Share Posted February 29, 2012 So down to the wire on starting a new practice in my area one final decision do I take a physician co owner not as simple as it seems....... I prefer to not have a co-owner but in order to bill medicare I have to have a co-owner (1%) and in the state of Mass I have to be a Professional Corp and this means I can't just have some random person owning the last 1% the challenge - if I don't have a 1% co-owner I can not bill medicare. I "think" the local area might support a pay for service home care practice (with visits costing $150-$250) but it is a big risk. I really believe this will be wildly successful as a medicare practice and self pay all others (and will provide 1500 claim form so they can submit for reimbursement easily) but do I do cash only and own 100% of the business - or - make the doc 1-5% owner and allow myself to take medicare (and likely be very successful.....) I go back and forth in my head about every 5 minutues...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted February 29, 2012 Moderator Share Posted February 29, 2012 depends what % of your practice you see as medicare. if it's a small % forget the doc. if it's > 10% you probably need one...you can write the contract in such a way that if they leave they have to sell the 1% back to you to transfer to a new doc. call it a partnership incentive or something, not "part ownership". and if you have 1 doc you probably need 2 at 1% each in case 1 leaves, dies, etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator ventana Posted February 29, 2012 Author Moderator Share Posted February 29, 2012 anticipate about 90% from medicare (there is no one doing home visits in a town of 50k people) and suspect will get some cash pay urgent care home visits and some wealthy who just pay cash have thought about having 2 doc's on board but not excited to pay supervision to two seperate doc's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmj11 Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 anticipate about 90% from medicare (there is no one doing home visits in a town of 50k people) and suspect will get some cash pay urgent care home visits and some wealthy who just pay cash have thought about having 2 doc's on board but not excited to pay supervision to two seperate doc's There may be other (besides Medicare) non-tangibles for having a doc be 1% owner. In my contracting with insurance companies there were a lot of raised eyebrows when they considered that I was the owner. Shouldn't be that way. My # 1 insurer (if they pulled out I would be dead) Regence, had their medical adviser (an MD) say that they should not do business with any PA or NP owned practices. So for them, I simply listed myself and my SP as "co-owners" while his share is just 1%. I have a second MD as SP (alternate) but I only pay him per Diem when I use him. That is rare. But it looks good on paper for the state and others to have him listed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.