Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
This article addresses two significant changes made by the Small Business and Work Opportunity Tax Act of 2007 ('Small Business Act') ' the new preparer penalty provisions (up to 50% of the fee for preparing the tax return), which have broad implications for attorneys who offer tax advice to their clients and the revised kiddie tax provisions, which now reach a substantially larger group of children. This article also details pertinent changes made by the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 ('TRHCA'), which extend the time for several tax cuts that had expired at the end of 2005, make certain tax breaks more beneficial, and provide greater flexibility regarding health savings accounts. Noteworthy new TRHCA provisions are highlighted that can benefit law firms and their clients, as well as individual attorneys and staff members and their families.
Features
There has been a great deal of publicity in the medical community about apology programs ' programs that encourage doctors to affirmatively admit medical mistakes to patients and their families. While there is a lot of support for the idea, there is also a good deal of controversy over whether these programs actually work to reduce litigation and the cost of medical malpractice claims. What, realistically, can apology programs do ' and what can they not do?
Features
Confidential physician peer reviews may be disclosed to plaintiffs in federal discrimination and antitrust cases in three federal circuits, even though all 50 states and the District of Columbia recognize a privilege against disclosure of the performance ratings. This growing federal-state divergence will make federal courts more attractive to plaintiffs filing civil rights suits involving doctors, attorneys say. At the same time, it may have a chilling effect on peer review participant candor and on the ability of health care facilities to recruit peer review team members.
When a patient receives substandard care from a health care provider practicing telemedicine from a different state, the question is presented: Which state has jurisdiction over the transactions? The answer to this will depend on the two (or more) states involved and the circumstances of the case, but in the civil context it will generally come down to the usual questions of 'minimum contacts,' the parties' expectations, etc. What happens, though, when local prosecutors wants to hold a practitioner in another state criminally liable for practicing medicine within their state?
Features
Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
