Diagnostic laboratories must dig into where their suppliers source their items to avoid surprises
Clinical laboratories in the US are under additional financial and operational pressure because of tariff fluctuations from the federal government among global trading partners. This brief overview explores clinical lab tariff strategies that may help organizations better prepare for difficult stretches.
Across the overall laboratory industry—including diagnostics settings—average duties on imported lab equipment and consumables hover around 23%, with personal protective equipment, lab instruments, and supply chains facing even higher tariffs depending on their origin, according to a report from Lab Manager, a sibling brand to Dark Daily.
“Don’t assume that just because something is made in the United States that it will be tariff free because many of the components are not,” Drew Kevorkian, founder and CEO at ARES Scientific, told Lab Manager. ARES Scientific maintains a useful online tariff guide.
These nuances can escalate costs, complicate budgeting, and squeeze margins, all of which pose a risk to financial viability for clinical labs.
When it comes to clinical lab tariff strategies, the starting point is clear. “Assume costs are going up one way or another. The best thing to do is be well informed,” Drew Kevorkian, founder and CEO at ARES Scientific, told Lab Manager. (Photo copyright: Ares Scientific.)
Tariff-Influenced Areas for Clinical Labs to Consider
Managers and others who oversee budgeting or product procurement should think about the following aspects as they plan out their clinical lab tariff strategies:
Component audits. Labs should undertake an audit of their consumables down to the stock-keeping unit (SKU), which is an alphanumeric descriptor that identifies a product. The goal is to identify the source of the products to determine if they come from tariff-affected countries, Kevorkian noted. This exercise allows clinical lab professionals to forecast cost scenarios and make informed procurement decisions.
Reused lab instruments. Tariffs introduce an opportunity to think about acquiring certified refurbished lab equipment. Such items, often already in the US, can offer meaningful savings and avoid import duties, according to Lab Manager.
Investigate in vitro diagnostics (IVD) sourcing. Clinical labs should look into where their IVD suppliers get their components, according to The Dark Report. Even if a lab buys from American-based suppliers, the IVD companies a laboratory works with might have ties overseas that aren’t immediately obvious. “All IVD companies get components from China,” Rob LaCroix, executive director of global strategy at LTC LLC, told attendees at the 2025 Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management. “Just-in-time [purchasing] with tariffs is a problem,” he noted.
Clinical Lab Tariff Strategies Should Model Various Budget Scenarios
Lab Manager suggested that laboratories build tiered budget models that consider various tariff scenarios:
Baseline case assumes stable tariffs (around 23% as noted earlier).
Worst case simulates escalation or new restrictions.
Optimistic case explores tariff relief or exemptions.
These forecast ranges enable clinical labs to develop contingency plans, such as temporarily reducing discretionary spending or exploring ways to pass on incremental costs.
“The timing of EWC with the release of this policy couldn’t be better,” CEO and founder of Momentum ConsultingValerie Palmieri told Dark Daily in an interview at Monday night’s opening reception. “It’s a great conference to not only catch up with colleagues but really hear and have those difficult discussions about where we are today, where we’re going, and where we need to be.”
Final LDT rule ‘radically’ different than draft
Tim Stenzel, MD, PhD, former director of the FDA’s Office of In Vitro Diagnostics called the finalized rule “radically different” from the proposed rule. In some ways it is less complex: “The bar is lower,” he said, noting that he was voicing his personal views and not those of the federal agency. “I was convinced that there would be lawsuits, but I’m now not sure if that’s advisable.”
Still, laboratory teams will have to parse the more than 500-page document to determine how the final rule relates to their specific circumstances. After that, it won’t be as challenging, Stenzel said.
His advice: First, read the rule. Second, reach out to FDA for help—he’s sure, he said, that the office is geared up to respond to a “ton of questions” about the implications for individual labs and are standing by to answer emails from labs. And, he added in a discussion session, emailing the agency is free.
The final rule will be in force 60 days after it’s published. Stenzel provided a timeline for some of the milestones:
1 Year: Comply with MD(AE) reporting and reporting of corrections and removals.
2 Years: Comply with labeling, registration and listing, and investigational use requirements.
3 Years: QS records and, in some cases, design controls and purchasing controls.
3.5 Years: Comply with high risk (class III) premarket review requirements.
4 Years: Comply with moderate and low-risk premarket review requirements.
Executive Chair and CEO of XiFin, Inc.Lâle White welcomed the audience with a morning keynote entitled “Big Changes in Healthcare” on new regulations and diagnostics players poised to reshape lab testing.
The diagnostics business is in constant flux, she noted, from payer requirements to greater regulatory and compliance burdens on labs. Other factors include the growing senior population and increasingly complex health conditions, rising costs throughout the healthcare ecosystem, falling funding and reimbursement, and staffing shortages.
As for the economic challenges, consumers are increasingly making decisions based on cost, convenience and quality. The population is shifting to Medicare advantage, which is more cost effective. But changes to the star ratings system will mean lower pay for payer organizations. Those companies will, in turn, mitigate their losses by making changes to pre-authorizations and tightening denials, even for clean claims.
Still, White said, more money isn’t the answer.
White urged the audience to use technology, including artificial intelligence and advances in genetic testing, to manage these and other industry changes.
“We need to optimize the tests we order,” she said. “And if we did that, lab diagnostics really has the potential to change the economics of health and improve outcomes.”
The FDA, Stenzel added, is “very interested” in stimulating innovation, building on the laboratory industry’s success in responding swiftly to the COVID pandemic and outbreaks of Monkey Pox, for example.
He shared lessons learned from recent public health emergencies, talked about CDC’s efforts to engage with clinical labs to improve future public health readiness and response and provided an overview of the CDC’s first laboratory-specific center.
“Laboratories are fundamental to public health,” he said. The industry is on the “front lines” when it comes to identifying threats, responding to them, and preparing for future responses.
Robert Michel, Editor-in-Chief of The Dark Report wrapped up the day’s regulatory discussions with a general session on the “regulatory trifecta” that includes the LDT final rule, CLIA regulations, and private payers’ policies for genetic claims.
Forces in play will directly impact the operations and financial stability of many of the nation’s clinical laboratories
With significant regulatory changes expected in the next 18 to 24 months, experts are predicting a “Perfect Storm” for managers of clinical laboratories and pathology practices.
Currently looming are changes to critical regulations in two regulatory areas that will affect hospitals and medical laboratories. One regulatory change is unfolding with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the other regulatory effort centers around efforts to update the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA).
The major FDA changes involve the soon-to-be-published Final Rule on Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs), which is currently causing its own individual storm within healthcare and will likely lead to lawsuits, according to the FDA Law Blog.
In a similar fashion—and being managed under the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)—are the changes to CLIA rules that are expected to be the most significant since 2003.
The final element of the “Perfect Storm” of changes coming to the lab industry is the increased use by private payers of Z-Codes for genetic test claims.
In his general keynote, Robert L. Michel, Dark Daily’s Editor-in-Chief and creator of the 29th Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management, will set the stage by introducing a session titled, “Regulatory Trifecta Coming Soon to All Labs! Anticipating the Federal LDT Rule, Revisions to CLIA Regulations, and Private Payers’ Z-Code Policies for Genetic Claims.”
“There are an unprecedented set of regulatory challenges all smashing into each other and the time is now to start preparing for the coming storm,” says Robert L. Michel (above), Dark Daily’s Editor-in-Chief and creator of the 29th Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management, a national conference on lab management taking place April 30-May 1, 2024, at the Hyatt in New Orleans. (Photo copyright: The Dark Intelligence Group.)
Coming Trifecta of Disruptive Forces to Clinical Laboratory, Anatomic Pathology
The upcoming changes, Michel notes, have the potential to cause major disruptions at hospitals and clinical laboratories nationwide.
“Importantly, this perfect storm—which I like to describe as a Trifecta because these three disruptive forces that will affect how labs will conduct business—is not yet on the radar screen of most lab administrators, executives, and pathologists,” he says.
Because of that, several sessions at this year’s Executive War College conference, now in its 29th year, will offer information designed to give attendees a better understanding of how to manage what’s coming for their labs and anatomic pathology practices.
“This regulatory trifecta consists of three elements,” adds Michel, who is also Editor-in-Chief of Dark Daily’s sister publication The Dark Report, a business intelligence service for senior level executives in the clinical laboratory and pathology industry, as well in companies that offer solutions to labs and pathology groups.
According to Michel, that trifecta includes the following:
Element 1
FDA’s Draft LDT Rule
FDA’s LDT rule is currently the headline story in the lab industry. Speaking about this development and two other FDA initiatives involving diagnostics at the upcoming Executive War College will be pathologist Tim Stenzel, MD, PhD, former director of the FDA’s Office of In Vitro Diagnostics. It’s expected that the final rule on LDTs could be published by the end of April.
Stenzel will also discuss harmonization of ISO 13485 Medical Devices and the FDA’s recent memo on reclassifying most high-risk in vitro diagnostics to moderate-risk to ease the regulatory burden on companies seeking agency review of their diagnostic assays.
Salerno will also cover the CDC’s efforts to foster closer connections with clinical labs and their local public health laboratories, as well as the expanding menu of services for labs that his department now offers.
Element 3
Private Payer Use of Z-Codes for Test Claims
On the third development—increased use by private payers of Z-Codes for genetic test claims—the speaker will be pathologist Gabriel Bien-Willner, MD, PhD. He is the Medical Director of the MolDX program at Palmetto GBA, a Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC). It is the MolDX program that oversees the issuance of Z-Codes for molecular and diagnostic tests.
UnitedHealthcare (UHC) was first to issue such a Z-Code policy last year, although it has delayed implementation several times. Other major payers are watching to see if UHC succeeds with this requirement, Michel says.
Other Critical Topics to be Covered at EWC
In addition to these need-to-know regulatory topics, Michel says that this year’s Executive War College will present almost 100 sessions and include 148 speakers. Some of the other topics on the agenda in New Orleans include the following and more:
Standardizing automation, analyzers, and tests across 25 lab sites.
Effective ways to attract, hire, and retain top-performing pathologists.
Leveraging your lab’s managed care contracts to increase covered tests.
“Our agenda is filled with the topics that are critically important to senior managers when it comes to managing their labs and anatomic pathology practices,” Michel notes.
“Every laboratory in the United States should recognize these three powerful developments are all in play at the same time and each will have direct impact on the clinical and financial performance of our nation’s labs,” Michel says. “For that reason, every lab should have one or more of their leadership team present at this year’s Executive War College to understand the implications of these developments.”
Visit here to learn more about the 29th Executive War College conference taking place in New Orleans.
Executives and pathologists from many of the nation’s most prominent clinical laboratories are on their way to the Crescent City today to share best practices, hear case studies from innovative labs, and network
NEW ORLEANS—This afternoon, more than 900 lab CEOs, administrators, and pathologists will convene for the 28th Annual Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management conference. Three topics of great interest will center around adequate lab staffing, effective cost management, and developing new sources of lab testing revenue.
Important sessions will also address the explosion in next-generation sequencing and genetic testing, proposed FDA regulation of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), and innovative ways that clinical laboratories and pathology groups can add value and be paid for that additional value.
All this is happening amidst important changes to healthcare and medicine in the United States. “Today, the US healthcare system is transforming itself at a steady pace,” explained Robert L. Michel, Editor-in-Chief of The Dark Report and Founder of the Executive War College. “Big multi-hospital health systems are merging with each other, and payers are slashing reimbursement for many medical lab tests, even as healthcare consumers want direct access to clinical laboratory tests and the full record of their lab test history.
“Each of these developments has major implications in how clinical laboratories serve their parent organizations, offer services directly to consumers, and negotiate with payers for fair reimbursement as in-network providers,” Michel added. “Attending the Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management equips lab leaders with the tools they’ll need to make smart decisions during these challenging times.”
Now in its 28th year, the Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management convenes April 25-26 in New Orleans. Executive War College extends to a third day with three full-day workshops: LEAN fundamentals for lab leaders, a genetic testing program track, and a digital pathology track. Learn more at www.ExecutiveWarCollege.com. (Photo copyright: The Dark Intelligence Group.)
Challenges and Opportunities for Clinical Laboratories
With major changes unfolding in the delivery and reimbursement of clinical services, clinical laboratory and pathology practice leaders need effective ways to respond to the evolving needs of physicians, patients, and payers. As The Dark Report has often covered, three overlapping areas are a source of tension and financial pressure for labs:
Day-to-day pressures to manage costs in the clinical laboratory or pathology practice.
The growing demand for genetic testing, accompanied by reimbursement challenges.
Evolving consumer expectations in how they receive medical care and interact with providers.
Addressing all three issues and much more, the 2023 Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management features more than 80 sessions with up to 125 lab managers, consultants, vendors, and in vitro diagnostic (IVD) experts as speakers and panelists.
Old-School Lab Rules Have Evolved into New-School Lab Rules
Tuesday’s keynote general sessions (to be reported exclusively in Wednesday’s Dark Daily ebriefing) will include four points of interest for clinical laboratory and pathology leaders who are managing change and pursuing new opportunities:
Positioning the lab to prosper by serving healthcare’s new consumers, new care models, new payment models, and more, with Michel at the podium.
How old-school lab rules have evolved into new-school lab rules and ways to transition the lab through today’s disrupters in healthcare and the clinical laboratory marketplace, with Stan Schofield, Managing Principal of the Compass Group.
Generating value by identifying risk signals in longitudinal lab data and opportunities in big data from payers, physicians, pharma, and bioresearch, with Brad Bostic, Chairman and CEO of hc1.
Wednesday’s keynote sessions (see exclusive insights in Friday’s Dark Daily ebriefing) explore:
Wednesday’s keynotes conclude with a panel discussion on delivering value to physicians, patients, and payers with lab testing services.
Clinical Labs, Payers, and Health Plans Swamped by Genetic Test Claims
Attendees of the 2023 Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management may notice a greater emphasis on whole genome sequencing and genetic testing this year.
As regular coverage and analysis in The Dark Report has pointed out, clinical laboratories, payers, and health plans face challenges with the explosion of genetic testing. Several Executive War College Master Classes will explore critical management issues of genetic and genomic testing, including laboratory benefit management programs, coverage decisions, payer relations, and best coding practices, as well as genetic test stewardship.
This year’s Executive War College also devotes a one-day intensive session on how community hospitals and local labs can set up and offer genetic tests and next-generation sequencing services. This third-day track features more than a dozen experts including:
During these sessions, attendees will be introduced to “dry labs” and “virtual CLIA labs.” These new terms differentiate the two organizations that process genetic data generated by “wet labs,” annotate it, and provide analysis and interpretation for referring physicians.
State of the Industry: Clinical Lab, Private Practice Pathology, Genetic Testing, IVD, and More
For lab consultants, executives, and directors interested in state-of-the-industry Q/A and discussions concerning commercial laboratories, private-practice pathology, and in vitro diagnostics companies, a range of breakout sessions, panels, and roundtables will cover:
Action steps to protect pathologists’ income and boost practice revenue.
Important developments in laboratory legal, regulatory, and compliance requirements.
New developments in clinical laboratory certification and accreditation, including the most common deficiencies and how to reach “assessment ready” status.
An update on the IVD industry and what’s working in today’s post-pandemic market for lab vendors and their customers.
Federal government updates on issues of concern to clinical laboratories, including PAMA, the VALID Act, and more.
Long-time attendees will notice the inclusion of “Diagnostics” into the Executive War College moniker. It’s an important addition, Michel explained for Dark Daily.
“In the recent past, ‘clinical laboratory’ and ‘anatomic pathology’ were terms that sufficiently described the profession of laboratory medicine,” he noted. “However, a subtle but significant change has occurred in recent years. The term ‘diagnostics’ has become a common description for medical testing, along with other diagnostic areas such as radiology and imaging.”
Key managers of medical laboratories, pathology groups, and in vitro diagnostics have much to gain from attending the Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management, now in its 28th year. Look for continued coverage through social media channels, at Dark Daily, and in The Dark Report.
There was cautious optimism about the ability of Canada’s medical laboratories to innovate in ways that advance patient care, while recognizing the ongoing challenge of adequate lab staffing and budget constraints
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA—This week, more than 150 leaders representing clinical laboratories, anatomic pathology labs, in vitro diagnostics (IVD) companies, and provincial health officials gathered for the first “Canadian Diagnostic Executive Forum” (CDEF) since 2019. It would be apt to say that the speakers objectively addressed all the good, the bad, and the ugly of Canada’s healthcare system and its utilization of medical laboratory testing services.
Over the two days of the conference, speakers and attendees alike concurred that the two biggest issues confronting clinical laboratories in Canada were inadequate staffing and an unpredictable supply chain. There also was agreement that the steady increase in prices, fueled by inflation, is exacerbating continuing cost increases in both lab salaries and lab supplies.
Canada’s Health System Has Several Unique Attributes
Canada’s healthcare system has two unique attributes that differentiate it from those of other nations. First, healthcare is mandated by a federal law, but generally each of Canada’s 13 provinces and territories operates its own health plan. Thus, the health system in each province and territory may cover a different mix of clinical services, therapeutic drugs, and medical procedures. The federal government typically pays 40% of a province’s health costs and the province funds the balance.
Second, it is a fact that 90% of the Canadian population lives within 150 miles of the United States border. Yet there are provinces with large populations that have geography that ranges from the US border to north of the Arctic Circle. These provinces have a major challenge to ensure equal access to healthcare regardless of where their citizens live.
During day one of the conference, several presentations addressed innovations that supported those labs’ efforts to deliver value and timely insights during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, a lab team in Alberta launched a research study involving SARS-CoV-2 virus surveillance from the earliest days of the outbreak. This study was presented by Mathew Diggle, PhD, FRCPath, Associate Professor and Program Lead for the Public Health Laboratory (ProvLab) Medical-Scientific Staff at Alberta Precision Laboratories in Edmonton, Alberta.
Study Designed to Identify Coinfections with COVID-19
While performing tens of thousands of COVID-19 tests from the onset of the pandemic, and identifying the emergence of variants, the ProvLab team also tracked co-infection involving other respiratory viruses.
“This is one of the largest eCoV [endemic coronavirus] studies performed during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Diggle said. “This broad testing approach helped to address a pivotal diagnostic gap amidst the emergence of a novel pathogen: cross-reactivity with other human coronaviruses that can cause similar clinical presentations. This broad surveillance enabled an investigation of cross-reactivity of a novel pathogen with other respiratory pathogens that can cause similar clinical presentations.
“Fewer than 0.01% of specimens tested positive for both SARS-CoV-2 and an eCoV,” he explained. “This suggested no significant cross-reactivity between SARS-CoV-2 and eCoVs on either test and provided a SARS-CoV-2 negative predictive value over 99% from an eCoV-positive specimen … The data we collected was highly compelling and the conclusion was that there was no coinfection.”
Chairing the two days of presentations at this weeks’ Canadian Diagnostic Executive Forum was Kevin D. Orr (above), Senior Director of Hospital Business at In-Common Laboratories. He also served on the program for this national conference serving clinical laboratories, anatomic pathology labs, and in vitro diagnostics (IVD) companies throughout Canada. This was the first gathering of this conference since 2019. Attendees were enthusiastic about the future of medical laboratory services in Canada, despite lab staffing shortages and rising costs due to inflation. (Photo copyright The Dark Report.)
Clinical Laboratory Regionalization in Quebec
One of Canada’s largest projects to regionalize and harmonize clinical laboratory services is proceeding in Quebec. Leading this effort is Ralph Dadoun, PhD, Project Director for OPTILAB Montreal, which is part of the Ministry of Health and Social Services in Quebec. The ambitious goal for this project is to move the 123 clinical laboratories within the province into 12 clusters. Initial planning was begun in 2013, so this project is in its ninth year of implementation.
During his presentation, Dadoun explained that the work underway in the 12 clusters involves creating common factors in these categories:
Implementation consistent with and respecting ISO-15189 criteria.
Another notable achievement in Quebec is the progress made to implement a common laboratory information system (LIS) within all 12 clusters. The first three laboratory clusters are undergoing their LIS conversions to the same platform during the next 180 days. The expectation is that use of a common LIS across all clinical laboratory sites in Quebec will unlock benefits in a wide spectrum of lab activities and work processes.
The 2022 CDEF featured speakers from most of the provinces. The common themes in these presentations were the shortage of lab personnel across all technical positions, disruptions in lab supplies, and the need to support the usual spectrum of lab testing services even as lab budgets are getting squeezed.
At the same time, there was plenty of optimism. Presentations involving adoption of digital pathology, advances in early disease detection made possible by new diagnostic technologies, and the expansion of precision medicine showed that clinical laboratories in Canada are gaining tools that will allow them to contribute to better patient care while helping reduce the downstream costs of care.
The Canadian Diagnostics Executive Forum is organized by a team from In-Common Laboratories in North York, Toronto, Ontario. Founded in 1967, it is a private, not-for-profit company that works with public hospitals and laboratory medicine providers. Information about CDEF can be found at its website, where several of this year’s presentations will be available for viewing.
