HCA Healthcare, Inc. - Annual Report: 2019 (Form 10-K)

☒	ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

☐	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Delaware		27-3865930
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
One Park Plaza Nashville , Tennessee		37203
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

Title of Each Class		Trading  Symbol(s)		Name of Each Exchange  on Which Registered
Common Stock , $0.01 Par Value		HCA		New York Stock Exchange

Large accelerated filer		☒		Accelerated filer		☐
Non-accelerated filer		☐		Smaller reporting company		☐
				Emerging growth company		☐

 

Our primary objective is to provide a comprehensive array of quality health care services in the most cost-effective manner possible. Our general, acute care hospitals typically provide a full range of services to accommodate such medical specialties as internal medicine, general surgery, cardiology, oncology, neurosurgery, orthopedics and obstetrics, as well as diagnostic and emergency services. Outpatient and ancillary health care services are provided by our general, acute care hospitals, freestanding surgery centers, freestanding emergency care facilities, urgent care facilities, clinics, diagnostic centers and rehabilitation facilities. Our psychiatric hospitals provide a full range of mental health care services through inpatient, partial hospitalization and outpatient settings.

Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (symbol “HCA”). Through our predecessors, we commenced operations in 1968. The Company was incorporated in Delaware in October 2010. Our principal executive offices are located at One Park Plaza, Nashville, Tennessee 37203, and our telephone number is (615)

We file certain reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), including annual reports on Form quarterly reports on Form and current reports on Form The SEC maintains an Internet site at http://www.sec.gov that contains the reports, proxy and information statements and other information we file. Our website address is www.hcahealthcare.com. Please note that our website address is provided as an inactive textual reference only. We make available free of charge, through our website, our annual report on Form quarterly reports on Form current reports on Form and all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. The information provided on our website is not part of this report, and is therefore not incorporated by reference unless such information is specifically referenced elsewhere in this report.

 

 

 

 

 

We currently own, manage or operate hospitals, freestanding surgery centers, freestanding emergency care facilities, urgent care facilities, clinics, diagnostic and imaging centers, radiation and oncology therapy centers, comprehensive rehabilitation and physical therapy centers, physician practices and various other facilities.

We also operate outpatient health care facilities, which include freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (“ASCs”), freestanding emergency care facilities, urgent care facilities, clinics, diagnostic and imaging centers, comprehensive rehabilitation and physical therapy centers, radiation and oncology therapy centers, physician practices and various other facilities. These outpatient services are an integral component of our strategy to develop comprehensive health care networks in select communities. Most of our ASCs are operated through partnerships or limited liability companies, with majority ownership of each partnership or limited liability company typically held by a general partner or member that is an affiliate of HCA.

 

Medicare is a federal program that provides certain hospital and medical insurance benefits to persons age 65 and over, some disabled persons, persons with renal disease and persons with Lou Gehrig’s Disease. Medicaid is a federal-state program, administered by the states, that provides hospital and medical benefits to qualifying individuals who are unable to afford health care. All of our general, acute care hospitals located in the United States are eligible to participate in Medicare and Medicaid programs. Amounts received under Medicare and Medicaid programs are generally significantly less than established hospital gross charges for the services provided.

classify treatments for illnesses according to the estimated intensity of hospital resources necessary to furnish care for each principal diagnosis. weights represent the average resources for a given relative to the average resources for all payments are adjusted for area wage differentials. Hospitals, other than those defined as “new,” receive PPS reimbursement for inpatient capital costs based on weights multiplied by a geographically adjusted federal rate. When the cost to treat certain patients falls well outside the normal distribution, providers typically receive additional “outlier” payments. These payments are financed by offsetting reductions in the inpatient PPS rates. A high-cost outlier threshold is set annually at a level that will result in estimated outlier payments equaling 5.1% of total inpatient PPS payments for the fiscal year.

rates are updated, and weights are recalibrated, using cost-relative weights each federal fiscal year (which begins October 1). The index used to update the rates (the “market basket”) gives consideration to the inflation experienced by hospitals and entities outside the health care industry in purchasing goods and services. Each federal fiscal year, the annual market basket update is reduced by a productivity adjustment based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (“BLS”) moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity, as required by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “Affordable Care Act”). A decrease in payment rates or an increase in rates that is below the increase in our costs may adversely affect our results of operations.

Medicare does not allow an inpatient hospital discharge to be assigned to a higher paying if certain designated hospital acquired conditions (“HACs”) were not present on admission and the identified HAC is the only condition resulting in the assignment of the higher paying In this situation, the case is paid as though the secondary diagnosis was not present. There are currently 14 categories of conditions on the list of HACs. In addition, the 25% of hospitals with the worst risk-adjusted HAC scores in the designated performance period receive a 1% reduction in their inpatient PPS Medicare payments. CMS has also established three National Coverage Determinations that prohibit Medicare reimbursement for erroneous surgical procedures performed on an inpatient or outpatient basis.

Payments to hospitals may also be reduced based on readmission rates. Each federal fiscal year, inpatient payments are reduced if a hospital experiences “excess” readmissions within the time period from the date of discharge for conditions designated by CMS. For federal fiscal year 2017 and subsequent years, CMS has designated six conditions or procedures, including heart attack, pneumonia and total hip arthroplasty. Hospitals with what CMS defines as excess readmissions for these conditions or procedures receive reduced payments for

CMS reimburses hospital outpatient services (and certain Medicare Part B services furnished to hospital inpatients who have no Part A coverage) on a PPS basis. CMS uses fee schedules to pay for physical, occupational and speech therapies, durable medical equipment, clinical diagnostic laboratory services, nonimplantable orthotics and prosthetics, freestanding surgery center services and services provided by independent diagnostic testing facilities. In addition, certain items and services furnished by provider-based departments, subject to certain exceptions, are not covered as outpatient department services under the outpatient PPS, but are reimbursed under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (“Physician Fee Schedule”), subject to adjustments as specified by CMS. In calendar year 2019, CMS began a of an expanded site-neutral policy under which clinic visit services provided at all provider-based departments are reimbursed at the Physician Fee Schedule rate, which is generally lower than the PPS rate. Previously, this rate did not apply to “excepted” provider-based departments. However, in September 2019, a federal judge invalidated the expansion of the site-neutral payment policy for 2019. CMS is appealing this decision, but it is reprocessing the 2019 claims paid at the lower rates. For calendar year 2020, CMS issued a final rule implementing year two of the policy Hospitals have also challenged the policy for 2020, but the case has not yet been decided.

Hospital outpatient services paid under PPS are classified into groups called ambulatory payment classifications (“APCs”). Services for each APC are similar clinically and in terms of the resources they require. A payment rate is established for each APC. Depending on the services provided, a hospital may be paid for more than one APC for a patient visit. The APC payment rates are updated for each calendar year. Each calendar year, the annual market basket update is further reduced by a productivity adjustment based on the BLS moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity as required by the Affordable Care Act. For calendar year 2019, CMS increased APC payment rates by an estimated 1.35%. This increase reflected a market basket increase of 2.9% with a negative 0.8 percentage point productivity adjustment and a negative 0.75 percentage point adjustment required by the Affordable Care Act. For calendar year 2020, CMS increased APC payment rates by an estimated 2.6%. This increase reflects a market basket increase of 3.0% with a negative 0.4 percentage point productivity adjustment. Together with other policy changes, CMS estimates that the calendar year 2020 rates will increase Medicare outpatient PPS payments by 1.3%. CMS requires hospitals to submit quality data relating to outpatient care to avoid receiving a 2.0 percentage point reduction in the annual payment update under the outpatient PPS.

methodology and rates as are applied to drugs. In a final rule effective January 1, 2018, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) reduced the Medicare payments under the outpatient PPS for most drugs obtained at the 340B-discounted rates. HHS continued to apply the reduced rates in 2019. On May 6, 2019, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia reaffirmed its ruling that the adoption of the 2018 rule had exceeded HHS’ statutory authority and reached the same conclusion with respect to a final rule for the 2019 rates. The court has remanded to the agency to craft appropriate remedies to implement the holding. HHS is appealing the decision but has also announced its intent to survey hospitals for drug acquisition cost data, which it may use to craft a remedy. Depending upon the remedy and the outcome of any appeal, this case could result in a decrease to the Company’s outpatient Medicare reimbursement. For calendar year 2020, HHS will continue to pay the reduced rates that took effect in 2018, although this is also the subject of ongoing litigation.

CMS reimburses inpatient rehabilitation facilities (“IRFs”) on a PPS basis. Under the IRF PPS, patients are classified into case mix groups that reflect the relative resource intensity typically associated with the patient’s clinical condition. The case mix groups are based upon impairment, age, functional motor and cognitive scores, and comorbidities (additional diseases or disorders from which the patient suffers). IRFs are paid a predetermined amount per discharge that reflects the patient’s case mix group and is adjusted for facility-specific factors, such as area wage levels, proportion of patients, and location in a rural area. Each federal fiscal year, the IRF rates are updated using a market basket index, which is reduced by a productivity adjustment based on the BLS moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity. For federal fiscal year 2019, CMS increased IRF payment rates by an estimated 1.3%, reflecting an IRF market basket update of 2.9% with a negative 0.8 percentage point productivity adjustment and a 0.75 percentage point reduction required by the Affordable Care Act, among other payment adjustments. For federal fiscal year 2020, CMS increased IRF payment rates by an estimated 2.5%, reflecting an IRF market basket update of 2.9% with a negative 0.4 percentage point productivity adjustment. In addition, CMS requires IRFs to report quality measures to avoid receiving a reduction of 2.0 percentage points to the market basket update. CMS has indicated that it is working toward a unified payment system for post-acute care services, including those provided by IRFs.

In order to qualify for classification as an IRF, at least 60% of a facility’s inpatients during the most recent review period must have required intensive rehabilitation services for one or more of 13 specified conditions. IRFs must also meet additional coverage criteria, including patient selection and care requirements relating to screenings, post-admission evaluations, ongoing coordination of care and involvement of rehabilitation physicians. A facility that fails to meet the 60% threshold, or other criteria to be classified as an IRF, will be paid under either the acute care hospital inpatient or outpatient PPS, which generally provide for lower payment amounts. As of December 31, 2019, we had two rehabilitation hospitals and 63 hospital rehabilitation units.

Inpatient hospital services furnished in psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric units of general, acute care hospitals and critical access hospitals are reimbursed on a PPS basis. The inpatient psychiatric facility (“IPF”) PPS is based upon a per diem payment, with adjustments to account for certain patient and facility characteristics. The IPF PPS contains an “outlier” policy for extraordinarily costly cases and an adjustment to a facility’s base payment if it maintains a full-service emergency department. CMS has established the IPF PPS payment rate in a manner intended to be budget neutral. Each federal fiscal year, IPF payment rates are updated using a market basket index, which is reduced by a productivity adjustment based on the BLS moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity. For federal fiscal year 2019, CMS increased IPF payment rates by an estimated 1.1%, which reflects a 2.9% IPF market basket update with a negative 0.8 percentage point productivity adjustment, a negative 0.75 percentage point adjustment as required by the Affordable Care Act, and other payment adjustments. For federal fiscal year 2020, CMS increased IPF payment

Historically, CMS updated reimbursement rates for ASCs based on changes to the consumer price index. However, for calendar years 2019 through 2023, CMS updates to ASC reimbursement rates will be based on the hospital market basket index, partly to promote site-neutrality between hospitals and ASCs. For each federal fiscal year, the ASC payment system update is reduced by a productivity adjustment based on the BLS moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity. For calendar year 2019, CMS increased ASC payment rates by 2.1%, which reflected a market basket increase of 2.9%, less a 0.8 percentage point productivity adjustment. For calendar year 2020, CMS increased ASC payment rates by 2.6%, which reflects a market basket increase of 3.0% and a negative 0.4 percentage point productivity adjustment. In addition, CMS has established a quality reporting program for ASCs under which ASCs that fail to report on specified quality measures receive a 2.0 percentage point reduction to the consumer price index update.

CMS has implemented contractor reform whereby CMS competitively bids the Medicare fiscal intermediary and Medicare carrier functions to Medicare Administrative Contractors (“MACs”), which are geographically assigned across 12 jurisdictions to service both Part A and Part B providers. While providers with operations across multiple geographies had the option of having all hospitals use one home office MAC, we chose to use the MACs assigned to the geographic areas in which our hospitals are located. CMS periodically bids, and the MAC servicing a geographic area can change as a result of the bid competition. MAC transition periods can impact claims processing functions and the resulting cash flows.

CMS contracts with third parties to promote the integrity of the Medicare program through reviews of quality concerns and detections, and corrections of improper payments. Quality Improvement Organizations (“QIOs”), for example, are groups of physicians and other health care quality experts that work on behalf of CMS to ensure that Medicare pays only for goods and services that are reasonable and necessary, and that are provided in the most appropriate setting. Under the Recovery Audit Contractor (“RAC”) program, CMS contracts with RACs on a contingency basis to conduct post-payment reviews to detect and correct improper payments in the Medicare program. The compensation for RACs is based on their review of claims submitted to Medicare for billing compliance, including correct coding and medical necessity, and the amount of overpayments and underpayments they identify. CMS limits the number of claims that RACs may audit by limiting the number of records that RACs may request from hospitals based on each provider’s claim denial rate for the previous year. CMS has implemented the RAC program on a permanent, nationwide basis and expanded the RAC program to the Managed Medicare program and Medicare Part D. CMS is transitioning some of its other integrity programs to a consolidated model by engaging Unified Program Integrity Contractors (“UPICs”) to perform audits, investigations and other integrity activities.

Because most states must operate with balanced budgets and because the Medicaid program is often the state’s largest program, states can be expected to adopt or consider adopting legislation designed to reduce their Medicaid expenditures. Budgetary pressures have, in recent years, resulted and likely will continue to result in decreased spending, or decreased spending growth, for Medicaid programs in many states. Certain states in which we operate have adopted broad-based provider taxes to fund the share of Medicaid programs. Many states have also adopted, or are considering, legislation designed to reduce coverage, enroll Medicaid recipients in managed care programs and/or impose additional taxes on hospitals to help finance or expand the states’ Medicaid systems.

Enrollment in managed Medicaid plans has increased in recent years, as state governments seek to control the cost of Medicaid programs. Managed Medicaid programs enable states to contract with one or more entities for patient enrollment, care management and claims adjudication. The states usually do not relinquish program responsibilities for financing, eligibility criteria and core benefit plan design. We generally contract directly with one or more of the designated entities, usually a managed care organization. The provisions of these programs are state-specific. Many states direct managed care plans to pass through supplemental payments to designated providers, independent of services rendered, to ensure consistent funding of providers that serve large numbers of patients. However, in an effort to more closely tie funds to delivery and outcomes, CMS began limiting these “pass-through payments” to managed Medicaid plans in 2016 and will ultimately prohibit such payments by 2027.

HHS continues to focus on shifting from traditional reimbursement models to alternative payment models that tie reimbursement to quality and/or value, including bundled payment and programs. Several private third-party payers are increasingly employing such reimbursement models, which may increasingly shift financial risk to providers.

In addition to making payments for services provided directly to beneficiaries, Medicare makes additional payments to hospitals that treat a disproportionately large number of patients (Medicaid and Medicare patients eligible to receive Supplemental Security Income). Disproportionate Share Hospital (“DSH”) payment adjustments are determined annually based on certain statistical information required by HHS and are paid as a percentage addition to payments. CMS also distributes a payment to each DSH hospital that is allocated according to the hospital’s proportion of uncompensated care costs relative to the uncompensated care amount of other DSH hospitals.

Some states make additional payments to providers through the Medicaid program for certain specific claims. These supplemental payments may be in the form of Medicaid DSH payments, which help to offset hospital uncompensated care costs, or upper payment limit supplemental payments, which are intended to address the difference between Medicaid payments and Medicare reimbursement rates. CMS is considering changes to both types of payments. The federal government distributes federal Medicaid DSH funds to each state based on a statutory formula. The states then distribute the DSH funding among qualifying hospitals. States have broad discretion to define which hospitals qualify for Medicaid DSH payments and the amount of such payments. The Affordable Care Act and subsequent legislation provide for reductions to the Medicaid DSH hospital program. Under the budget bill signed into law in February 2018, Medicaid DSH payments will be reduced by $4 billion in 2020 and by $8 billion per year from 2021 through 2025. However, Congress has delayed the implementation of these reductions until May 23, 2020.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Generally, other hospitals in the communities we serve provide services similar to those offered by our hospitals. Additionally, in recent years the number of freestanding specialty hospitals, surgery centers, emergency departments, urgent care centers and diagnostic and imaging centers in the geographic areas in which we operate has increased significantly. As a result, most of our hospitals operate in a highly competitive environment. In some cases, competing facilities are more established than our hospitals. Some competing facilities are physician-owned or are owned by government agencies and many others are owned by entities that may be supported by endowments, charitable contributions and/or tax revenues and are exempt from sales, property and income taxes. Such exemptions and support are not available to our hospitals and may provide the or entities an advantage in funding capital expenditures. In

Trends toward clinical and pricing transparency may impact our competitive position in ways that are difficult to predict. For example, hospitals are currently required to publish online a list of their standard charges for items and services. In 2019, CMS issued a final rule that, beginning in 2021, will require hospitals to publish additional types of standard charges for all items and services, including discounted cash prices and payer-specific and negotiated charges, in a publicly accessible online file. Hospitals will also be required to publish a consumer-friendly list of charges for certain “shoppable” services (i.e., services that can be scheduled by a patient in advance) and associated ancillary services. The 2019 rule is the subject of ongoing court challenges.

Another major factor in the competitive position of our hospitals is our ability to negotiate service contracts with group purchasers of health care services. Managed care plans attempt to direct and control the use of hospital services and obtain discounts from hospitals’ established gross charges. Similarly, employers and traditional health insurers continue to attempt to contain costs through negotiations with hospitals for managed care programs and discounts from established gross charges. Generally, hospitals compete for service contracts with group purchasers of health care services on the basis of price, market reputation, geographic location, quality and range of services, quality of the medical staff and convenience. Our future success will depend, in part, on our ability to retain and renew our contracts with third-party payers and enter into new contracts on favorable terms. Other health care providers may impact our ability to enter into contracts with third-party payers or negotiate increases in our reimbursement and other favorable terms and conditions. For example, some of our competitors may negotiate exclusivity provisions with managed care plans or otherwise restrict the ability of managed care companies to contract with us. Price transparency initiatives and increasing vertical integration efforts involving third-party payers and health care providers, among other factors, may increase these challenges. Moreover, the trend toward consolidation among private third-party payers tends to increase payer bargaining power over fee structures. In addition, health reform efforts, such as the Affordable Care Act’s limitations on rescissions of coverage and condition exclusions, may lead to private third-party payers increasingly demanding reduced fees or being unwilling to negotiate reimbursement increases. Health plans increasingly utilize narrow networks that restrict the number of participating providers or tiered networks that impose significantly higher cost sharing obligations on patients that obtain services from providers in a disfavored tier. These trends may continue regardless of potential repeal or replacement of, or changes to, the

Admissions, average lengths of stay and reimbursement amounts continue to be negatively affected by third-party payer authorization requirements, utilization review and pressure to maximize outpatient and alternative health care delivery services for less acutely ill patients. Increased competition, admission constraints and third-party payer pressures are expected to continue. To meet these challenges, we intend to expand and update our facilities or acquire or construct new facilities where appropriate, enhance the provision of a comprehensive array of outpatient services, offer market competitive pricing to group purchasers of health care services, upgrade facilities and equipment and offer new or expanded programs and services.

The HHS Office of Inspector General (the “OIG”), among other regulatory agencies, is responsible for identifying and eliminating fraud, abuse and waste. The OIG carries out this mission through a nationwide program of audits, investigations and inspections. The OIG provides guidance to the industry through various methods, including advisory opinions and “Special Fraud Alerts.” These Special Fraud Alerts do not have the force of law, but identify features of arrangements or transactions that the government believes may cause the arrangements or transactions to violate the Anti-kickback Statute or other federal health care laws. The OIG has identified several incentive arrangements that constitute suspect practices, including: (a) payment of any incentive by a hospital each time a physician refers a patient to the hospital, (b) the use of free or significantly discounted office space or equipment in facilities usually located close to the hospital, (c) provision of free or significantly discounted billing, nursing or other staff services, (d) free training for a physician’s office staff in areas such as management techniques and laboratory techniques, (e) guarantees which provide, if the physician’s income fails to reach a predetermined level, the hospital will pay any portion of the remainder, (f) or interest-free loans, or loans which may be forgiven if a physician refers patients to the hospital, (g) payment of

We are subject to state and federal laws that govern the submission of claims for reimbursement and prohibit the making of false claims or statements. One of the most prominent of these laws is the FCA, which may be enforced by the federal government directly or by a plaintiff, or whistleblower, on the government’s behalf. The government may use the FCA to prosecute Medicare and other government program fraud in areas such as coding errors, billing for services not provided and submitting false cost reports. In addition, the FCA covers payments made in connection with the Exchanges created under the Affordable Care Act, if those payments include any federal funds. When a private party brings a action under the FCA, the defendant is not made aware of the lawsuit until the government commences its own investigation or makes a determination whether it will intervene. If a defendant is determined by a court of law to be liable under the FCA, the defendant may be required to pay three times the actual damages sustained by the government, plus substantial mandatory civil penalties for each separate false claim. These penalties are updated annually based on changes to the consumer price index.

Covered entities must report breaches of unsecured protected health information to affected individuals without unreasonable delay but not to exceed 60 days after discovery of the breach by a covered entity or its agents. Notification must also be made to HHS and, in certain situations involving large breaches, to the media. HHS is required to publish on its website a list of all covered entities that report a breach involving more than 500 individuals. All uses or disclosures of unsecured protected health information are presumed to be breaches unless the covered entity or business associate establishes that there is a low probability the information has been compromised. Various state laws and regulations may also require us to notify affected individuals in the event of a data breach involving individually identifiable information.

There are numerous other laws and legislative and regulatory initiatives at the federal and state levels addressing privacy and security concerns. Our facilities remain subject to any federal or state privacy-related laws that are more restrictive than the privacy regulations issued under HIPAA. These laws vary and could impose additional penalties. For example, the Federal Trade Commission uses its consumer protection authority to initiate enforcement actions in response to data breaches. The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the “CCPA”) affords consumers expanded privacy protections effective January 1, 2020. The potential effects of this legislation are and may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies and to incur substantial costs and expenses to comply. For example, the CCPA gives California residents expanded rights to access and require deletion of their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing and

Many foreign data privacy regulations (including the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”)) are more stringent than those in the United States. In the case of non-compliance with a material provision of the GDPR (such as non-adherence to the core principles of processing personal data), regulators have the authority to levy a fine in an amount that is up to the greater of 20 million or 4% of global annual turnover in the prior year. If it is determined that non-compliance is related to a non-material provision (such as failure to comply with technical measures), regulators may impose a fine in an amount that is up to the greater of 10 million or 2% of the global annual turnover from the prior year. These administrative fines are discretionary and based, in each case, on a multi-factored approach.

The government broadly interprets EMTALA to cover situations in which individuals do not actually present to a hospital’s emergency room, but present for emergency examination or treatment to the hospital’s campus, generally, or to a hospital-based clinic that treats emergency medical conditions or are transported in a hospital-owned ambulance, subject to certain exceptions. At least one court has interpreted the law also to apply to a hospital that has been notified of a patient’s pending arrival in a owned ambulance. EMTALA does not generally apply to individuals admitted for inpatient services. The government has expressed its intent to investigate and enforce EMTALA violations actively.

Some of the states in which we operate have laws prohibiting corporations and other entities from employing physicians, practicing medicine for a profit and making certain direct and indirect payments to, or entering into arrangements with, health care providers designed to induce or encourage the referral of patients to, or the recommendation of, particular providers for medical products and services. Possible sanctions for violation of these restrictions include loss of license and civil and criminal penalties. In addition, agreements between the corporation and the physician may be considered void and unenforceable. These statutes vary from state to state, are often vague and have seldom been interpreted by the courts or regulatory agencies.

In addition to national enforcement initiatives, federal and state investigations have addressed a wide variety of routine health care operations such as: cost reporting and billing practices, including for Medicare outliers; financial arrangements with referral sources; physician recruitment activities; physician joint ventures; and hospital charges and collection practices for patients. We engage in many of these routine health care operations and other activities that could be the subject of governmental investigations or inquiries. For example, we have significant Medicare and Medicaid billings, numerous financial arrangements with physicians who are referral sources to our hospitals, and joint venture arrangements involving physician investors. Certain of our individual facilities have received, and other facilities may receive, government inquiries from, and may be subject to investigation by, federal and state agencies. Any additional investigations of the Company, our executives or managers could result in significant liabilities or penalties to us, as well as adverse publicity.

As currently structured, the Affordable Care Act expands coverage through a combination of private sector health insurance requirements, public program expansion and other reforms. Expansion of coverage through the private sector has been driven by requirements applicable to health insurers, employers, and individuals. For example, health insurers are prohibited from imposing annual coverage limits, dropping coverage, excluding persons based upon conditions or denying coverage for any individual who is willing to pay the premiums for such coverage. Expansion in public program coverage has been driven primarily by expanding the categories of individuals eligible for Medicaid coverage and permitting individuals with relatively higher incomes to qualify. A number of states, including Texas and Florida, have opted out of the Medicaid expansion provisions, which they may do without losing federal funding. For states that have not participated in the Medicaid expansion, the maximum income level required for individuals and families to qualify for Medicaid varies widely from state to state. Some states are using waivers granted by CMS to expand their Medicaid programs, impose different eligibility or enrollment restrictions, or otherwise implement programs that vary from federal standards. In addition, some states are proposing or have implemented various health reform initiatives at the state level. For example, some states have proposed public health insurance options, and some states have passed or are considering legislation to address billing.

The federal government and most states have enacted antitrust laws that prohibit certain types of conduct deemed to be anti-competitive. These laws prohibit price fixing, market allocation, concerted refusal to deal, market monopolization, price discrimination, tying arrangements, acquisitions of competitors and other practices that have, or may have, an adverse effect on competition. Violations of federal or state antitrust laws can result in various sanctions, including criminal and civil penalties. Antitrust enforcement in the health care industry is currently a priority of the Federal Trade Commission and the DOJ. We believe we are in compliance with such federal and state laws, but courts or regulatory authorities may reach a determination in the future that could adversely affect our operations.

 

 

 

 

 

was appointed Chief Executive Officer effective January 1, 2019 and was appointed as a director in September 2018. From November 2016 through December 2018, Mr. Hazen served as the Company’s President and Chief Operating Officer. Prior to that, he served as Chief Operating Officer of the Company from

was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resource Officer effective November 1, 2019. Ms. Berres joined HCA in 1993 and served in various capacities, including as Vice President — Human Resources from April 2013 through October 2019.

was appointed Senior Vice President — Internal Audit Services effective January 1, 2019. Mr. Billington previously served as Vice President — Corporate Internal Audit from June 2005 to December 2018. Prior to joining HCA, Mr. Billington worked as a managing director for FTI Consulting, Inc., a director for KPMG LLP and was a senior manager at Arthur Andersen LLP.

was appointed Senior Vice President — Government Relations effective October 1, 2019. Prior to joining HCA, Mr. Cohen spent 20 years with the Federation of American Hospitals, most recently as Executive Vice President of Public Affairs, where he managed all advocacy, public affairs and communications for the association.

has served as President — Physician Services Group since October 2011. From October 2011 to January 2015, Dr. Cuffe also served as a Vice President of the Company. Prior to that time, Dr. Cuffe served Duke University Health System as Vice President for Ambulatory Services and Chief Medical Officer from March 2011 to October 2011 and Vice President Medical Affairs from June 2005 to March 2011. He also served Duke University School of Medicine as Vice Dean for Medical Affairs from June 2008 to March 2011, Deputy Chair of the Department of Medicine from August 2009 to August 2010 and Associate Professor of Medicine from March 2005 to October 2011. Prior that time, Dr. Cuffe served in various leadership roles with the Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center and Duke University School of Medicine.

was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Nursing Officer in January 2015. Dr. Englebright previously served as Vice President and Chief Nursing Officer from 2007 to January 2015. Dr. Englebright joined HCA in 1992 as a critical care nurse at Lewisville Medical Center in Texas and became Chief Nursing Officer of HCA’s San Antonio Community Hospital in 1996. Dr. Englebright currently serves on The Joint Commission’s Board of Commissioners.

was appointed President — American Group in January 2013. Prior to that, Mr. Foster served as President — Southwest Group from February 2011 to January 2013 and as Division President for the Central and West Texas Division from January 2006 to February 2011. Mr. Foster joined HCA in March 2001 as President and CEO of St. David’s HealthCare in Austin, Texas and served in that position until February 2011. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Foster served in various executive capacities within the Baptist Health System in Knoxville, Tennessee and The Methodist Hospital System in Houston, Texas.

was appointed President — National Group in February 2011. Prior to that, Mr. Hall served as President — Eastern Group from October 2006 to February 2011. Mr. Hall had previously served the Company as President — North Florida Division from April 2003 until October 2006, as President of the East Florida Division from January 1999 until April 2003, as a Market President in the East Florida Division from January 1998 until December 1998, as President of the South Florida Division from February 1996 until December 1997, and as President of the Southwest Florida Division from October 1994 until February 1996, and in various other capacities since 1987.

was appointed President — Service Line and Operations Integration in February 2011. Prior to that, Mr. Moore had served as President — Outpatient Services Group since January 2006. Mr. Moore served as Senior Vice President and as Chief Operating Officer — Outpatient Services Group from July 2004 to

was appointed Senior Vice President — Provider Relations in January 2015. Prior to that time, she served as Vice President — National Sales from April 2008 to January 2015. From 2000 to 2008, Ms. Morgan served in various capacities with Pfizer Inc., including Vice President of Managed Care for the Customer Business Unit from 2005 to 2008.

was appointed Senior Vice President — Finance and Treasurer in February 2017. Mr. Morrow served as Vice President — Finance and Treasurer from July 2016 through January 2017. From 2011 to 2016, Mr. Morrow served the Company as Vice President — Development/Special Assets. Mr. Morrow served as a partner in the law firm of Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis from 2006 to October 2011. Prior to becoming a partner, Mr. Morrow was an associate at Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis and at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton.

was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer in June 2012. Prior to that time, he served as Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Information Technology & Services from March 2010 to May 2012 and Vice President — Information Technology & Services Field Operations from September 2006 to February 2010. From January 1998 to September 2006, he served in various Vice President roles in the Company’s Information Technology & Services department. Mr. Paslick joined the Company in 1985.

was appointed President — Clinical Services Group and Chief Medical Officer in November 2007. Dr. Perlin had served as Chief Medical Officer and Senior Vice President — Quality of the Company from August 2006 to November 2007. Prior to joining the Company, Dr. Perlin served as Under Secretary for Health in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs since April 2004. Dr. Perlin joined the Veterans Health Administration in November 1999 where he served in various capacities, including as Deputy Under Secretary for Health from July 2002 to April 2004, and as Chief Quality and Performance Officer from November 1999 to September 2002. He also served as Senior Advisor to the Acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs from July 2014 to September 2014 and as Chairman for the American Hospital Association in 2015.

was appointed Senior Vice President — Marketing and Communications in October 2017. Prior to that time, she served as Vice President of Marketing and Customer Relationship Management from August 2017 to October 2017 and Vice President of Customer Relationship Management from January 2012 to August 2017. Ms. Reiner joined the Company in 2000 and served in various roles with the Company’s Mountain Division from 2000 to 2012.

has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since January 2014. Mr. Rutherford previously served as Chief Operating Officer of the Company’s Clinical and Physician Services Group from January 2011 to January 2014 and Chief Financial Officer of the Company’s Outpatient Services Group from November 2008 to January 2011. Prior to that time, Mr. Rutherford was employed by Summit Consulting Group of Tennessee from July 2007 to November 2008 and was Chief Operating Officer of Psychiatric Solutions, Inc. from March 2006 to June 2007. Mr. Rutherford also previously served in various positions with the Company from 1986 to 2005, including Chief Financial Officer of what was then the Company’s Eastern Group, Director of Internal Audit and Director of Operations Support.

was appointed as Senior Vice President and Chief Development Officer in December 2009. From 1987 to 1996 and again from 1999 to 2009, Mr. Sowell was a partner at the law firm of Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis where he specialized in the areas of health care law, mergers and acquisitions, joint

ventures, private equity financing, tax law and general corporate law. He also the firm’s corporate and commercial transactions practice. From 1996 to 1999, Mr. Sowell served as the head of development, and later as the Chief Operating Officer of Arcon Healthcare.

was appointed Senior Vice President — Payer Contracting and Alignment (formerly Senior Vice President — Employer and Payer Engagement) in July 2016. Ms. Torres joined HCA in 1993 and served in various capacities, including as Vice President of Employer and Payer Engagement and Vice President — Strategy.

has served as Senior Vice President and General Counsel since November 1997. Mr. Waterman served as a partner in the law firm of Latham & Watkins from September 1993 to October 1997; he was Chair of the firm’s health care group during 1997.

was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer effective January 1, 2019. Prior to that time, Ms. Whalen served as Vice President — Ethics and Compliance from August 2013 through December 2018 and Assistant Vice President — Ethics and Compliance Program Development from March 2000 through July 2013. Prior to joining HCA in January 1998, Ms. Whalen served as Associate Counsel to President Clinton with responsibility for the White House’s ethics program. She began her government service in the ethics division of the General Counsel’s Office at the U.S. Commerce Department. Prior to that, she practiced labor and employment law in Dayton, Ohio.

was appointed Senior Vice President and Controller in April 2016. Prior to that time, Mr. Wyatt served the Company as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer — IT&S from January 2013 to April 2016 and Chief Financial Officer — Clinical Services Group from October 2010 until January 2013. From 2000 to 2010, Mr. Wyatt served in various capacities with Ernst & Young LLP.

There is uncertainty regarding whether, when, and how the Affordable Care Act may be further changed, the ultimate outcome of court challenges and how the law will be interpreted and implemented. Changes by Congress or government agencies could eliminate or alter provisions beneficial to us, while leaving in place provisions reducing our reimbursement or otherwise negatively impacting our business. There is also uncertainty regarding whether, when, and what other health reform initiatives will be adopted and the impact of such efforts on providers and other health care industry participants. Further, the outcome of the 2020 federal election and its potential impact on health reform efforts is unknown. Some presidential candidates and members of Congress have proposed measures that would expand government-sponsored coverage, including single-payer proposals (often referred to as “Medicare for All”), and some states are considering similar measures. CMS has indicated that it intends to increase flexibility in state Medicaid programs, including by expanding the scope of waivers under which states may implement Medicaid expansion provisions, impose different eligibility or enrollment restrictions, or otherwise implement programs that vary from federal standards. CMS administrators have also signaled interest in changing Medicaid payment models. Other health reform initiatives and proposals, such as those addressing charges, may impact prices, our relationships with patients and payers, and our competitive position. Other industry participants, such as private payers and large employer groups and their affiliates, may also introduce financial or delivery system reforms. We are unable to predict the nature and success of such initiatives. Health care reform initiatives, including changes to or repeal or invalidation of the Affordable Care Act, may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flow, capital resources, and liquidity.

In recent years, legislative and regulatory changes have resulted in limitations on and, in some cases, reductions in levels of payments to health care providers for certain services under the Medicare program. Congress has established automatic spending reductions that extend through 2029. However, the percentage reduction for Medicare may not be more than 2% for a fiscal year, with a uniform percentage reduction across all Medicare programs. We are unable to predict what other deficit reduction initiatives may be proposed by Congress. These reductions are in addition to reductions mandated by the Affordable Care Act and other laws. Further, from time to time, CMS revises the reimbursement systems used to reimburse health care providers, including changes to the system and other payment systems, which may result in reduced Medicare payments. For example, under a site neutrality policy, clinic visit services provided by provider-based departments that were formerly paid under the outpatient PPS are now paid under the Physician Fee Schedule, subject to certain exceptions that are being phased out through calendar years 2019 and 2020. Although a federal judge invalidated the expansion of the policy for calendar year 2019, in a decision that CMS is appealing, CMS issued a final rule implementing year two of the policy for 2020. CMS is also considering proposals to reduce drug costs and has reduced Medicare payment rates under the outpatient PPS for

Because most states must operate with balanced budgets and because the Medicaid program is often a state’s largest program, some states have enacted or may consider enacting legislation designed to reduce their Medicaid expenditures. Further, many states have also adopted, or are considering, legislation designed to reduce coverage, enroll Medicaid recipients in managed care programs, Medicaid recipients who fail to meet work requirements and/or impose additional taxes on hospitals to help finance or expand the states’ Medicaid systems. Periods of economic weakness may increase the budgetary pressures on many states, and these budgetary pressures may result in decreased spending, or decreased spending growth, for Medicaid programs and the Children’s Health Insurance Program in many states. Some states that provide Medicaid supplemental payments are reviewing these programs or have filed waiver requests with CMS to replace these programs, and CMS has performed and continues to perform compliance reviews of some states’ programs and is considering changes to the requirements for such programs, which could result in Medicaid supplemental payments being reduced or eliminated. Further, legislation and administrative actions at the federal level may significantly alter the funding for, or structure of, the Medicaid program. For example, from time to time, Congress considers proposals to restructure the Medicaid program to involve block grants that would be administered by the states. CMS has announced its intent to introduce additional flexibilities for Medicaid program operation, including block grants and increased use of value-based care models.

The number of freestanding specialty hospitals, surgery centers, emergency departments, urgent care centers and diagnostic and imaging centers in the geographic areas in which we operate has increased. Many individuals are seeking a broader range of services at outpatient facilities as a result of the growing availability of stand-alone outpatient health care facilities, the increase in payer reimbursement policies that restrict inpatient coverage and the increase in the services that can be provided on an outpatient basis, including high margin services. Consequently, most of our hospitals operate in a highly competitive environment, which may put pressure on our pricing, ability to contract with third-party payers and the Company’s strategy for volume growth. Some of the facilities that compete with our hospitals are physician-owned or are owned by governmental agencies or corporations supported by endowments, charitable contributions and/or tax revenues and can finance capital expenditures and operations on a basis. Recent consolidations of hospital entities may intensify this competitive pressure. There is also increasing consolidation in the third-party payer industry, including vertical integration efforts among third-party payers and health care providers, and

Private third-party payers, including HMOs, PPOs and other managed care plans, typically reimburse health care providers at a higher rate than Medicare, Medicaid or other government health care programs. Reimbursement rates are set forth by contract when our facilities are and payers utilize plan structures to encourage or require the use of providers. Revenues derived from private third-party payers (domestic only) accounted for 51.6%, 52.4% and 53.5% of our revenues for 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. As a result, our ability to maintain or increase patient volumes covered by private third-party payers and to maintain and obtain favorable contracts with private third-party payers significantly affects the revenues and operating results of our facilities.

Additionally, if we violate the Anti-kickback Statute or Stark Law, or if we improperly bill for our services, we may be found to violate the FCA, either under a suit brought by the government or by a private person under a , or “whistleblower,” suit. See Item 1, “Business — Regulation and Other Factors.”

A variety of state, national, foreign and international laws and regulations apply to the collection, use, retention, protection, security, disclosure, transfer and other processing of personal data. For example, the CCPA which affords consumers expanded privacy protections such as the right to know what personal information is collected and how it is used, went into effect on January 1, 2020. California residents also have the right to request a business to delete their personal information unless it is necessary for the business to maintain for certain purposes. They have the right to know if their personal information is being sold or shared and the right to opt-out of the sale or disclosure. Failure to comply with the CCPA may result in attorney general enforcement action and damage to our reputation. The CCPA also provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that may increase data breach litigation. The potential effects of this legislation are and may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies and to incur substantial costs and expenses to comply. The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”) contains stricter privacy restrictions than laws and regulations in the United States and provides for significant fines in the event of violations. These administrative fines are based on a multi-factored approach. We expect that there will continue to be new laws, regulations and industry standards concerning privacy, data protection and information security proposed and enacted in various jurisdictions, which could impact our operations and cause us to incur substantial costs.

We engage in consumer debt collection and credit reporting for hospitals and certain hospitals. The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the TCPA restrict the methods that companies may use to contact and seek payment from consumer debtors

Volume, admission and trends may be impacted by other factors beyond our control, such as changes in volume of certain high acuity services, variations in the prevalence and severity of outbreaks of influenza and other illnesses and medical conditions, seasonal and severe weather conditions, changes in treatment regimens and medical technology and other advances. These factors may reduce the demand for services we offer and decrease the reimbursement that we receive. Significant limits on the scope of services reimbursed, cost controls, changes to physician utilization practices, treatment methodologies, reimbursement rates and fees and other factors beyond our control could have a material, adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.

Health care companies are subject to numerous investigations by various government agencies. Further, under the FCA, private parties have the right to bring , or “whistleblower,” suits against companies that submit false claims for payments to, or improperly retain overpayments from, the government. Some states have adopted similar state whistleblower and false claims provisions. Certain of our individual facilities and/or affiliates have received, and other facilities and/or affiliates may receive, government inquiries from, and may be subject to investigation by, federal and state agencies. Depending on whether the underlying conduct in these or future inquiries or investigations could be considered systemic, their resolution could have a material, adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

A component of our business strategy is acquiring hospitals and other health care businesses. We may encounter difficulty acquiring new facilities or other businesses as a result of competition from other purchasers that may be willing to pay purchase prices that are higher than we believe are reasonable. Some states require CONs in order to acquire a hospital or other facility or to expand facilities or services. In addition, the acquisition of health care facilities often involves licensure approvals or reviews and complex change of ownership processes for Medicare and other payers. Further, many states have laws that restrict the conversion or sale of hospitals to entities. These laws may require prior approval from the state attorney general, advance notification of the attorney general or other regulators and community involvement. Attorneys general in states without specific requirements may exercise broad discretionary authority over transactions involving the sale of under their general obligations to protect the use of charitable assets. These legislative and administrative efforts often focus on the appropriate valuation of the assets divested and the use of the proceeds of the sale by the seller and may include consideration of commitments for capital improvements and charity care by the purchaser. Also, the increasingly challenging regulatory and enforcement

We may be unable to timely and effectively integrate hospitals and other businesses that we acquire with our ongoing operations, or we may experience delays implementing operating procedures and systems. Hospitals and other health care businesses that we acquire may have unknown or contingent liabilities, including liabilities for failure to comply with health care and other laws and regulations, medical and general professional liabilities, workers’ compensation liabilities and tax liabilities. Although we typically exclude significant liabilities from our acquisition transactions and seek indemnification from the sellers for these matters, we could experience difficulty enforcing those obligations, experience liability in excess of any indemnification obtained or otherwise incur material liabilities for the conduct of acquired businesses. Such liabilities and related legal or other costs could harm our business and results of operations.

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

Item 4.

Mine Safety Disclosures

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Period		Total Number of Shares Purchased				Average Price Paid per Share				Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs				Approximate Dollar Value of Shares That May Yet Be Purchased Under Publicly Announced Plans or Programs
October 1, 2019 through October 31, 2019			898,323			$	120.23				898,323			$	1,405
November 1, 2019 through November 30, 2019			585,739			$	136.44				585,739			$	1,325
December 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019			585,429			$	143.49				585,429			$	1,241
Total for Fourth Quarter 2019			2,069,491			$	131.40				2,069,491			$	1,241

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This annual report on Form includes certain disclosures which contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws, which involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include statements regarding expected share-based compensation expense, expected capital expenditures, expected dividends, expected net claim payments and all other statements that do not relate solely to historical or current facts, and can be identified by the use of words like “may,” “believe,” “will,” “expect,” “project,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “initiative” or “continue.” These forward-looking statements are based on our current plans and expectations and are subject to a number of known and unknown uncertainties and risks, many of which are beyond our control, which could significantly affect current plans and expectations and our future financial position and results of operations. These factors include, but are not limited to, (1) the impact of our substantial indebtedness and the ability to refinance such indebtedness on acceptable terms, (2) the impact of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “Affordable Care Act”), including the effects of court challenges to, any repeal of, or changes to, the Affordable Care Act or additional changes to its implementation, the possible enactment of additional federal or state health care reforms and possible changes to other federal, state or local laws or regulations affecting the health care industry, including single-payer proposals (often referred to as “Medicare for All”), (3) the effects related to the continued implementation of the sequestration spending reductions required under the Budget Control Act of 2011, and related legislation extending these reductions, and the potential for future deficit reduction legislation that may alter these spending reductions, which include cuts to Medicare payments, or create additional spending reductions, (4) increases in the amount and risk of collectability of uninsured accounts and deductibles and copayment amounts for insured accounts, (5) the ability to achieve operating and financial targets, and attain expected levels of patient volumes and control the costs of providing services, (6) possible changes in Medicare, Medicaid and other state programs, including Medicaid supplemental payment programs or Medicaid waiver programs, that may impact reimbursements to health care providers and insurers and the size of the uninsured or underinsured population, (7) the highly competitive nature of the health care business, (8) changes in service mix, revenue mix and surgical volumes, including potential declines in the population covered under third-party payer agreements, the ability to enter into and renew third-party payer provider agreements on acceptable terms and the impact of consumer-driven health plans and physician utilization trends and practices, (9) the efforts of health insurers, health care providers, large employer groups and others to contain health care costs, (10) the outcome of our continuing efforts to monitor, maintain and comply with appropriate laws, regulations, policies and procedures, (11) increases in wages and the ability to attract and retain qualified management and personnel, including affiliated physicians, nurses and medical and technical support personnel, (12) the availability and terms of capital to fund the expansion of our business and improvements to our existing facilities, (13) changes in accounting practices, (14) changes in general economic conditions nationally and regionally in our markets, (15) the emergence of and effects related to pandemics, epidemics and infectious diseases, (16) future divestitures which may result in charges and possible impairments of long-lived assets, (17) changes in business strategy or development plans, (18) delays in receiving payments for services provided, (19) the outcome of pending and any future tax audits, disputes and litigation associated

with our tax positions, (20) potential adverse impact of known and unknown government investigations, litigation and other claims that may be made against us, (21) the impact of potential cybersecurity incidents or security breaches, (22) our ongoing ability to demonstrate meaningful use of certified electronic health record (“EHR”) technology and the impact of interoperability requirements, (23) the impact of natural disasters, such as hurricanes and floods, or similar events beyond our control, (24) changes in U.S. federal, state, or foreign tax laws including interpretive guidance that may be issued by taxing authorities or other standard setting bodies, and (25) other risk factors described in this annual report on Form As a consequence, current plans, anticipated actions and future financial position and results of operations may differ from those expressed in any forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of HCA. You are cautioned not to unduly rely on such forward-looking statements when evaluating the information presented in this report.

Net income attributable to HCA Healthcare, Inc. totaled $3.505 billion, or $10.07 per diluted share, for 2019, compared to $3.787 billion, or $10.66 per diluted share, for 2018. The 2019 results include gains on sales of facilities of $18 million, or $0.04 per diluted share, and losses on retirement of debt of $211 million, or $0.47 per diluted share. The 2018 results include gains on sales of facilities of $428 million, or $0.91 per diluted share, and losses on retirement of debt of $9 million, or $0.02 per diluted share. The 2019 results also include revenues of $86 million, or $0.19 per diluted share, related to the resolution of transaction price differences regarding certain services performed in prior periods. The 2018 results also include a reduction in our provision for income taxes of $67 million, or $0.19 per share, for the remeasurement of certain of our deferred tax assets and liabilities for which we were unable to record reasonable estimates in 2017. During 2019 and 2018, we recorded reductions to the provision for professional liability risks of $50 million, or $0.11 per diluted share, and $70 million, or $0.15 per diluted share, respectively. During 2018, we recorded additional expenses and losses of revenues estimated at approximately $31 million, or $0.07 per diluted share, associated with the impact of hurricane Michael on our Florida facilities. This amount is prior to any insurance recoveries. During 2018, we recorded a benefit of $49 million, or $0.11 per diluted share, from an insurance recovery related to hurricane Harvey business interruption losses incurred during 2017, and we recorded a reduction to the provision for income taxes of $28 million, or $0.08 per diluted share, for tax credits related to certain 2017 hurricane-related expenses. Our provisions for income taxes for 2019 and 2018 included tax benefits of $65 million, or $0.19 per diluted share, and $124 million, or $0.35 per diluted share, respectively, related to employee equity award settlements. All “per diluted share” disclosures are based upon amounts net of the applicable income taxes. Shares used for diluted earnings per share were 348.226 million shares and 355.303 million shares for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. During 2019 and 2018, we repurchased 7.949 million and 14.070 million shares, respectively, of our common stock.

We believe we are well positioned in a number of large and growing markets that will allow us the opportunity to generate long-term, attractive growth through the expansion of our presence in these markets. We plan to continue recruiting and strategically collaborating with the physician community and developing comprehensive service lines such as cardiology, neurology, oncology, orthopedics and women’s services. Additional components of our growth strategy include providing access and convenience through developing various outpatient facilities, including, but not limited to surgery centers, urgent care clinics, freestanding emergency care facilities and imaging centers.

Achieving high levels of patient safety, patient satisfaction and clinical quality are central goals of our business. To achieve these goals, we have implemented a number of initiatives including infection reduction initiatives, hospitalist programs, advanced health information technology and evidence-based medicine programs. We routinely analyze operational practices from our best-performing hospitals to identify ways to implement organization-wide performance improvements and reduce clinical variation. We believe these initiatives will continue to improve patient care, help us achieve cost efficiencies and favorably position us in an environment where our constituents are increasingly focused on quality, efficacy and efficiency.

We depend on the quality and dedication of the health care providers and other team members who serve at our facilities. We believe a critical component of our growth strategy is our ability to successfully recruit and strategically collaborate with physicians and other professionals to provide high quality care. We attract and retain physicians by providing high quality, convenient facilities with advanced technology, by expanding our specialty services and by building our outpatient operations. We believe our continued investment in the employment, recruitment and retention of physicians will improve the quality of care at our facilities.

We believe there is significant opportunity to continue to grow our company by fully leveraging the scale and scope of our organization. We continue to invest in initiatives such as care navigators, clinical data exchange and centralized patient transfer operations, which will enable us to improve coordination of care and patient retention across our markets. We believe our centrally managed business processes and ability to leverage cost-saving practices across our extensive network will enable us to continue to manage costs effectively. We continue to invest in our Parallon subsidiary group to leverage key components of our support infrastructure, including revenue cycle management, health care group purchasing, supply chain management and staffing functions.

We continue to believe there are significant growth opportunities in our markets. We will continue to provide financial and operational resources to analyze and develop our opportunities. To complement our growth agenda, we intend to focus on selectively developing and acquiring new hospitals, outpatient facilities and other health care service providers. We believe the challenges faced by the hospital industry may continue to spur consolidation and we believe our size, scale, national presence and access to capital will position us well to participate in any such consolidation.

Prior to November 2017, patients treated at hospitals for care, who have income at or below 200% of the federal poverty level, were eligible for charity care. During November 2017, we expanded our charity policy to include patients who have income above 200%, but at or below 400%, of the federal poverty level and we limit the patient responsibility amounts for these patients to a percentage of their annual household income, computed on a sliding scale based upon their annual income and the applicable percentage of the federal poverty level. The federal poverty level is established by the federal government and is based on income and family size. Because we do not pursue collection of amounts determined to qualify as charity care, they are not reported in revenues. We provide discounts to uninsured patients who do not qualify for Medicaid or charity care. We may attempt to provide assistance to uninsured patients to help determine whether they may qualify for Medicaid, other federal or state assistance, or charity care. If an uninsured patient does not qualify for these programs, the uninsured discount is applied.