Radiology groups rail against additional tariffs on imaging devices
Radiology groups are rallying together to denounce new potential tariffs on medical imaging devices and other healthcare supplies.
Last month, the Department of Commerce launched an investigation into the import of CT scanners, MRI machines, X-ray apparatuses and other radiologic equipment. The Trump administration is mulling whether tariffs or other measures are necessary to “protect national security,” and was accepting comments through Oct. 17.
Previously, the American College of Radiology and AdvaMed shared their comments ahead of the deadline. Others also weighing in since then have included RadNet Inc., the Radiology Business Management Association (RBMA) the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), and the latter’s Japanese counterpart.
RSNA—which represents over 52,000 medical imaging professionals across all subspecialties and spanning 150 countries—urged for “careful consideration” when weighing further fees for radiologic devices. Many imaging machines and their components are produced globally, and additional fees could impact the healthcare ecosystem’s stability.
“Disruptions in the supply chain may lead to higher costs and delays in patient care, which could ultimately have a negative effect on health outcomes,” RSNA Chair Jeffrey S. Klein, MD, also a professor with the University of Vermont, wrote in comments submitted Oct. 17. “It is essential that any regulatory measures protect patient access to advanced medical technologies and avoid unintended limitations.”
Maintaining an active global market for medical technology is “essential for driving ongoing innovation, keeping costs manageable, and enhancing the quality of care for patients,” he added. These sentiments were echoed by the Japan Medical Imaging and Radiological Systems Industries Association, or “JIRA,” which represents companies including Tokyo-based Fujifilm and the foreign divisions of others like Hologic. The Japanese imaging industry has long provided medical devices to the U.S. under a zero-tariff framework. This has enabled America to immediately benefit from Japanese technological advancements.
JIRA welcomes a recent agreement with the U.S. to settle on a simple 15% tariff, “from the perspective of trade stability.”
“However, introducing further tariff measures could lead to serious consequences for both the people and medical device industries of the United States and Japan,” it wrote in comments dated Oct. 16, with the potential effects including significant price increases and reduced investments in America.
RBMA—which represents over 2,00 radiology business leaders across 800 practices in all 50 states—said providers are already facing financial hardships. Rural hospitals are particularly vulnerable, with over 700 at risk for closure, according to previous estimates. Adding extra cost pressures from tariffs could force many to shutter or reduce services, “depriving millions of Americans of critical care.”
Radiology practices tend to operate under fixed reimbursement schedules, which do not account for the rising costs associated with tariffs. This could leave providers unable to offset the financial burden, the association wrote. As a result, new fees would directly increase operational costs, reduce investments in new imaging technologies and jeopardize access to care.
“Tariff relief is not only a healthcare imperative, but also an economic and national security priority,” RBMA President Jamie Dyer, MBA, and Co-executive Directors Jessica Struve and Linda Wilgus, MBA, wrote Oct. 16, urging for a three-year delay in implementing any new tariffs and a product exclusion process.
Finally, Los Angeles-based RadNet—the country’s largest operator of freestanding imaging centers, with over 400 concentrated in 8 states—also is facing cost pressures. Medicare payment rates for MRI, PET and other advanced modalities have dropped over the last decade. New tariff-related costs, limits on where imaging centers can buy new devices, and domestic-substitution requirements will “go unrecognized and uncompensated by insurers.”
“We know this from history,” wrote Steve Forthuber, RadNet’s president and chief operating officer of Eastern Operations. “During the COVID-19 public health emergency, RadNet spent millions of dollars to implement exhaustive precautionary measures in all of our markets to combat the spread of the virus … so that most of our facilities could remain open and accessible. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services never recognized the costs associated with these measures under the [physician fee schedule]. Thus, even modest input cost increases may jeopardize patient access in community and rural practices.”
RadNet buys imaging technology (where possible) from U.S. manufacturers and believes import restrictions will narrow sourcing options and increase (rather than mitigate) healthcare system vulnerabilities, Forthuber added.
“RadNet supports the department’s objective of strengthening national security through resilient medical technology supply chains,” he wrote in comments dated Oct. 17. “However, we caution against broad restrictions that could inadvertently undermine patient access, provider sustainability, or U.S. leadership in medical imaging and AI.”
Marty Stempniak has covered healthcare since 2012, with his byline appearing in the American Hospital Association's member magazine, Modern Healthcare and McKnight's. Prior to that, he wrote about village government and local business for his hometown newspaper in Oak Park, Illinois. He won a Peter Lisagor and Gold EXCEL awards in 2017 for his coverage of the opioid epidemic.