Long-term economic benefits attributed to IVF-conceived children: A lifetime tax calculation

Ferring International Center, St Prex, Switzerland.
The American journal of managed care (Impact Factor: 2.26). 10/2008; 14(9):598-604.
Source: PubMed


To evaluate whether lifetime future net tax revenues from an in vitro fertilization (IVF)-conceived child are substantial enough to warrant public subsidy relative to the mean IVF treatment costs required to obtain 1 live birth.
Mathematical generational accounting model.
The model estimates direct financial interactions between the IVF-conceived child and the government during the child's projected lifetime. In the model, we accrue IVF costs required to conceive the child to the government, and then we estimate future net tax revenue to the federal and state governments from this individual, offset by direct financial transfers from the government (eg, child allowances, education, Medicare, and Social Security). We discount lifetime costs and gross tax payments at Treasury Department rates to establish the present value of investing in IVF. We applied US Congressional Budget Office projected changes in tax rates over the course of the model.
An IVF-conceived child, average in every respect (eg, future earnings, healthcare consumption, and life expectancy), represents a net positive return to the government. Based on an average employed individual born in 2005, the projected net lifetime tax contribution is US $606,200. Taking into consideration IVF costs and all direct financial interactions, the net present value is US $155,870.
Lifetime net taxes paid from a child relative to the child's initial IVF investment represent a 700% net return to the government in discounted US dollars from fully employed individuals. This suggests that removing barriers to IVF would have positive tax benefits for the government, notwithstanding its beneficial effect on overall economic growth.

Download full-text


Available from: Stijn Hoorens
  • Source
    • "The developed world is in the midst of a widespread infertility epidemic . Economies in Japan, the United States, southern Europe, and even China are threatened by a decreasing population of young people having to support an increasing population of elderly and retirees [1]. The most common reason to see a doctor in countries like India and China, seemingly plagued with overpopulation, is for infertility. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: The purpose of this review is to summarize science-based new treatments for human reproductive failure and future developments. Results: First will be discussed popular but erroneous myths of current non-science based treatments. Then will be discussed new treatments and their scientific base, including ovary and egg freezing, and transplantation to preserve fertility in young women undergoing gonadotoxic chemotherapy and radiation for cancer; new perspectives on human epididymal sperm maturation based on a comparison between ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) with testis sperm versus epididymal sperm; simplifying IVF and reducing cost by more intelligent and milder ovarian stimulation; improving pregnancy rate in older women; searching the genome to find genes which control spermatogenesis and whose deletion or mutation causes spermatogenic failure; and human spermatogenic stem cell culture to treat azoospermia, and to preserve fertility in pre-pubertal boys undergoing cancer treatment. Conclusion: With stem cell biology and molecular understanding of reproductive failure, new therapies for previously untreatable infertility are currently on the near horizon. Conversely our clinical results with new therapeutic approaches are adding to our understanding of the basic science of reproduction. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Molecular Genetics of Human Reproductive Failure.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2012 · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta
  • Source
    • "After the GA framework described by Cardarelli et al., we model direct financial transactions between an IVF-conceived singleton and the UK government over their projected lifetime (Cardarelli, 2000). Based on a previously reported health investment model, the average IVF treatment costs to achieve a singleton live birth are treated as an investment in human capital with long-term economic consequences (Connolly et al., 2008). In this contract, the state makes age-dependent direct financial transfers to the individual and the individual pays money to the state through taxation. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over the past decade, demand for fertility treatments has increased as a result of delaying time to first pregnancy and growing awareness and acceptance of available treatment options. Despite increasing demand, health authorities often view infertility as a low health priority and consequently limit access to treatments by rationing and limiting funds. To assess the long-term economic benefits attributed to in vitro fertilization (IVF)-conceived children, we developed a health investment model to evaluate whether state-funded IVF programmes in the UK represent sound fiscal policies. Based on the average investment cost to conceive an IVF singleton, we describe the present value of net taxes derived from gross taxes paid minus direct government transfers received (e.g. education, health, pension) over the lifetime of the child. To establish the present value of investing in IVF, we have discounted all costs from benefits (i.e. lifetime taxes paid) using UK Treasury department rates based on a singleton delivery with similar characteristics for education, earnings, health and life expectancy to a naturally conceived child. The lifetime discounted value of net taxes from an IVF-conceived child with mother aged 35 is pound 109,939 compared with pound 122,127 for a naturally conceived child. The lifetime undiscounted net tax contribution for the IVF-conceived child and naturally conceived child are pound 603,000 and pound 616,000, respectively. An investment of pound 12,931 to achieve an IVF singleton is actually worth 8.5-times this amount to the UK Treasury in discounted future tax revenue. The analysis underscores that costs to the health sector are actually investments when a broader government perspective is considered over a longer period of time.
    Preview · Article · Mar 2009 · Human Reproduction
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare regulatory and economic aspects of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in developed countries. Comparative policy and economic analysis. Couples undergoing ART treatment in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Scandinavia, Japan, and Australia. Description of regulatory and financing arrangements, cycle costs, cost-effectiveness ratios, total expenditure, utilization, and price elasticity. Regulation and financing of ART share few general characteristics in developed countries. The cost of treatment reflects the costliness of the underlying healthcare system rather than the regulatory or funding environment. The cost (in 2006 United States dollars) of a standard IVF cycle ranged from $12,513 in the United States to $3,956 in Japan. The cost per live birth was highest in the United States and United Kingdom ($41,132 and $40,364, respectively) and lowest in Scandinavia and Japan ($24,485 and $24,329, respectively). The cost of an IVF cycle after government subsidization ranged from 50% of annual disposable income in the United States to 6% in Australia. The cost of ART treatment did not exceed 0.25% of total healthcare expenditure in any country. Australia and Scandinavia were the only country/region to reach levels of utilization approximating demand, with North America meeting only 24% of estimated demand. Demand displayed variable price elasticity. Assisted reproductive technology is expensive from a patient perspective but not from a societal perspective. Only countries with funding arrangements that minimize out-of-pocket expenses met expected demand. Funding mechanisms should maximize efficiency and equity of access while minimizing the potential harm from multiple births.
    No preview · Article · Jul 2009 · Fertility and sterility
Show more