Company: UHS
Filing Date: 2025-02-26
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0000950170-25-027785
Chunk: 124

Company: UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES INC
Filing Date: 2025-02-26
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 1B
Chunk 124
---
 The Legislation provides for reductions to Medicaid DSH payments which are scheduled to begin in 2025.

A 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling limited the federal government’s ability to expand health insurance coverage by holding unconstitutional sections of the Legislation that sought to withdraw federal funding for state noncompliance with certain Medicaid coverage requirements. Pursuant to that decision, the federal government may not penalize states that choose not to participate in the Medicaid expansion by reducing their existing Medicaid funding. Therefore, states can choose to expand or not to expand their Medicaid program without risking the loss of federal Medicaid funding. As a result, many states, including Texas, have not expanded their Medicaid programs without the threat of loss of federal funding. CMS has previously granted section 1115 demonstration waivers providing for work and community engagement requirements for certain Medicaid eligible individuals. CMS has also released guidance to states interested in receiving their Medicaid funding through a block grant mechanism. The Biden administration withdrew certain previously issued section 1115 demonstrations aligned with these policies, but Georgia has imposed work and community engagement requirements under a Medicaid demonstration program that launched July 1, 2023. President Trump, more favorable to work and community engagement requirements in his first administration, is more likely to again seek these obligations for Medicaid demonstration programs. If additional section 1115 demonstrations that include work and community requirements are implemented, we anticipate that they would lead to reductions in coverage and likely increases in uncompensated care in those states where these demonstration waivers are granted.

On December 14, 2018, a Texas Federal District Court deemed the Legislation to be unconstitutional in its entirety. The Court concluded that the Individual Mandate is no longer permissible under Congress’s taxing power as a result of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017 reducing the individual mandate’s tax to $0 (i.e., it no longer produces revenue, which is an essential feature of a tax), rendering the Legislation unconstitutional.  The Court also held that because the individual mandate is “essential” to the Legislation and is inseverable from the rest of the law, the entire Legislation is unconstitutional. That ruling was ultimately appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which decided in California v. Texas that the plaintiffs in the matter lacked standing to bring their constitutionality claims.  The Court did not reach the plaintiffs’ merits arguments, which specifically challenged the constitutionality of the Legislation’s individual mandate and the entirety of the Legislation itself. As a result, the Legislation will continue to be law, and the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS")