JMA-JIF row heats up over new medical fees list

AMMAN — A decision by the Jordan Medical Association (JMA) to issue a new list regulating medical fees has been met with disapproval by the Jordan Insurance Federation (JIF). 

In addition to increasing doctors’ examination fees, the new list regulates physicians’ specialty-based scopes of practice and the amount charged by doctors for procedures that aren’t addressed in the current list due to their novelty, according to JMA President Zeyad Al Zu’bi. 

In an interview with The Jordan Times, he said that the JIF has taken an obstinate stance, refusing to negotiate or discuss the terms of the new list with the JMA. 

Since 2008 and up until today, insurance companies have increased insurance premiums by over 250 per cent, while medical fees remained the same, he added. 

The current list for medical fees hasn’t been updated since 2008, according to Zu’bi.

He also pointed out that the JMA has recently met with the Jordan Association for Medical Insurance (JAMI), which has 24 member facilities, including insurance funds and pharmaceutical companies, among others. 

The meeting discussed a number of matters, including implementing the 2018 mutual fund regulation, which aims to organise doctors’ relationship with insurance companies, as well as the JMA’s new medical fees list. 

“I can’t say that the association has approved the list. However, they were open to discussing a mechanism to implement it gradually over a period of 12 months in a manner that reduces the burden” on all concerned parties, he said. 

“We are taking into consideration that insurance funds and companies have already established their contracts based on the 2008 list, which means that a sudden change would be very costly,” he added. 

It’s possible that the JMA will suspend all transactions with insurance companies that don’t abide by the new list once it goes into effect, Zu’bi continued, noting that deciding and enforcing medical fees falls within the legal powers of the JMA. 

Speaking with The Jordan Times, JIF Chairman Majed Smairat described the JMA’s decision as “unjustifiably unilateral”. 

The increase on some medical procedures and examinations in the new list has exceeded 300 per cent, which will pose “tremendous” financial burdens on all parties involved in medical billing, “especially citizens”, he said. 

Zu’bi denied an increase at this rate, noting that the medical fees in the new list, which hasn’t been published yet, align with the Kingdom’s inflation rate over the past 14 years and each doctor’s level of expertise. 

“Citizens will mostly bear the cost of increasing fees in the new list, which is roughly JD150 million, as insurance companies will be forced to increase their rates,” Smairat added, noting that doctors’ fees account for roughly 40 per cent of medical bills. 

He pointed out that roughly 30 per cent of Jordan’s population doesn’t have medical insurance. 

“This will cause private sector companies to refrain from providing their employees and their families with medical insurance plans,” he continued. 

Smairat also denied JMA’s allegations that insurance companies have increased their rates by over 200 per cent since 2008. 

“Solving this matter requires the intervention of a governmental third-party to regulate the increase at a reasonable rate that suits all concerned parties,” he noted.

Moreover, Smairat views that allowing the JMA to enforce medical fees on its own for the entire sector is a “conflict of interest”. 

It also contradicts with the Competition Law no. (33) of the year 2004 as amended by the Law No. (18) of 2011, he added. 

The law stipulates that “[p]rices of products and services shall be set in accordance with the conditions of market rules and the principles of free competition, with the exception of” the prices of basic materials and temporary measures related to exceptional circumstances, emergencies or natural disasters.

Smairat referenced article 20 (c) of the law, which prohibits “[a]ny association or entity from the private sector assuming the regulation of the practice of any profession or sponsoring the interests of economic or commercial institutions... from issuing any decision that would be in prejudice of competition, or limitation thereon or violation thereof in violation of the provisions of this law or any other legislation”.