This bill requires most public and private health plans to cover inhalation drugs and their administration equipment used to treat asthma and COPD without applying a deductible and with a small fixed monthly cost-share. It amends the Public Health Service Act, the Internal Revenue Code, ERISA, and parts of the Social Security Act to impose those coverage rules across group and individual market plans, employer-sponsored ERISA plans, and Medicare.
The measure also creates a new HHS payment program to subsidize specified inhaler products for uninsured people and adds technical safe harbors to preserve high-deductible health plan (HDHP) status when plans exempt inhalers from deductibles. For plan designers, benefit managers, Medicare administrators, providers, and health centers, the bill replaces varied copay and deductible treatment of inhalers with a single statutory approach that shifts where costs fall and changes administrative obligations for 2026 and later plan years.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires group and individual health coverage, ERISA plans, and Medicare to provide benefits for specified inhaler products without applying a deductible and with maximum cost sharing per 30‑day supply. It also directs HHS to run a payment program for uninsured patients who receive inhalers from registered providers. The statutory changes span the Public Health Service Act, the Internal Revenue Code, ERISA, and the Social Security Act.
Who It Affects
Affected entities include private health insurers and self‑funded ERISA plans, Medicare Part B and Part D administrators, pharmacy benefit managers and pharmacies that dispense inhalers, hospitals and ambulatory providers that bill for inhalation drugs, and safety‑net providers that may participate in the uninsured payment program.
Why It Matters
The bill standardizes patient out‑of‑pocket exposure for inhalers nationwide and narrows plan design discretion on deductibles and copays. That reduces point‑of‑care financial barriers for people with asthma or COPD but creates explicit new financial obligations for payers and administrative rules for Medicare and safety‑net programs—changes that will affect premium-setting, formulary strategy, and provider billing.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill defines “specified inhaler products” broadly to include maintenance and rescue inhalation drugs (metered‑dose, dry powder, aerosols, inhalation solutions), bronchodilators, corticosteroids, and the devices and equipment used to administer them (spacers, tubing, nebulizers, masks, valve‑holding chambers). For any product that meets that definition, the measure requires coverage and limits patient cost sharing at the plan level.
For private coverage, the statute adds a new section to the Public Health Service Act and parallel provisions in the Internal Revenue Code and ERISA that prohibit plans from applying a deductible to specified inhaler products and cap cost sharing per 30‑day supply. Plans must count whatever cost sharing occurs toward an enrollee’s deductible and out‑of‑pocket maximum.
The bill builds in a narrow set of conforming provisions so plans that exempt inhalers from deductibles retain HDHP status and catastrophic plan treatment where relevant.Medicare changes appear in both Part B and Part D. For Part B, the bill creates a special payment rule for specified inhaler products furnished on or after January 1, 2026: Medicare payment is modified so patient liability is limited (the statutory language directs payment accounting that effectively leaves a fixed patient portion per 30‑day supply).
For Part D, the bill prevents application of the Part D deductible to specified inhalers and requires plan cost sharing for these products not to exceed the statutory monthly cap; it also modifies low‑income cost‑sharing rules to reflect the new cap.Finally, the bill directs HHS to establish, starting January 1, 2026, a program to reimburse program‑registered providers who furnish specified inhaler products to uninsured individuals. Participating providers must be licensed in the state where they dispense products and must agree not to hold uninsured patients liable for more than the statutory patient share for that month’s supply when the provider receives payment under the program.
HHS may implement these provisions through guidance or subregulatory instruction, and reimbursement under the uninsured program is subject to appropriations.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The statute caps patient cost sharing at $15 per 30‑day supply for any defined “specified inhaler product” and prohibits applying a deductible to those products under covered plans.
The coverage and cost‑sharing rules apply across three tracks: federal group plans subject to ERISA, individual and group market coverage under the PHSA amendments, and the Internal Revenue Code provision for tax treatment of employer plans.
For Medicare, the bill changes Part B billing and Part D rules so inhalers furnished on or after January 1, 2026, are not subject to the Part D deductible and Medicare’s Part B payment/accounting is adjusted to limit beneficiary liability per 30‑day supply.
HHS must establish a payment program to reimburse registered providers for supplying inhalers to uninsured individuals; providers must be licensed in state and sign an agreement not to bill the uninsured more than the patient share when the program pays. Payments under that program are subject to appropriations.
The bill includes HDHP and catastrophic plan safe harbors so plans that exempt inhalers from deductibles do not automatically lose high‑deductible or catastrophic plan status for tax and ACA purposes.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Mandate for coverage and cap on patient cost sharing for inhalers
This provision adds a new PHSA section requiring group health plans and health insurance issuers in the group and individual markets to cover all specified inhaler products, to exempt those products from any deductible, and to cap enrollee cost sharing at a fixed amount per 30‑day supply. It also instructs plans to count that cost sharing toward any deductible or out‑of‑pocket limits that would have otherwise applied. Practically, issuers must update benefit design, pharmacy billing rules, and member communications to segregate inhaler benefit treatment from other prescription benefits.
Parallel tax‑code requirement for group plans
The IRC insertion mirrors the PHSA mandate for group plans and functions to bind employer‑sponsored plans through tax code compliance. This creates parallel enforcement pressure: failure to comply could risk adverse tax consequences and complicate plan non‑compliance exposure. The IRC text includes the same definition of specified inhaler products and cost‑sharing rules, aligning tax treatment and ERISA/PHSA obligations.
ERISA plan obligations and counting toward OOP limits
ERISA plans and health insurance issuers offering group coverage are explicitly required to follow the same no‑deductible, capped‑copay rules. The ERISA amendment also requires plans to count patient payments for inhalers toward the enrollee’s out‑of‑pocket and deductible amounts, which limits carriers’ ability to use accumulator programs to exclude inhaler payments from OOP accumulation for members.
Safe harbors for HDHPs and application date
The bill adds an HDHP safe harbor to the Internal Revenue Code and amends the Affordable Care Act’s catastrophic plan rules so exempting inhalers from a deductible does not disqualify a plan from HDHP or catastrophic status. The effective date language makes these plan design rules applicable to plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2026, giving employers and insurers a defined window to rework designs and systems.
Medicare payment and beneficiary liability changes for inhalers
The Part B amendment adds a specific payment clause for specified inhaler products furnished on or after January 1, 2026, tying Medicare’s payment accounting to a beneficiary liability that effectively leaves a set patient portion for monthly supply. The Part D amendments prohibit application of the Part D deductible to specified inhalers, cap Part D cost sharing per month, and adjust low‑income subsidy cost‑sharing rules to respect the cap. Plan sponsors and Medicare contractors will need billing and claims edits to identify products meeting the statutory definition and apply the modified rules.
Federal reimbursement program for uninsured recipients
HHS must establish a program for providers to submit claims for providing specified inhaler products to uninsured individuals; payments are subject to available appropriations. Program‑registered providers must be licensed in the dispensing state and enter an agreement not to hold uninsured patients liable for more than the capped patient share when the provider is reimbursed under the program. This creates a federal stopgap for uninsured access, but participation hinges on HHS rulemaking, provider enrollment, reimbursement rates, and congressional appropriations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Patients with asthma or COPD who face high point‑of‑care costs — they receive predictable, small monthly copays and are shielded from plan deductibles for inhaler drugs and associated devices, reducing treatment interruptions.
- Low‑income Medicare beneficiaries who receive inhalers — the Part D and Part B changes lower out‑of‑pocket exposure at pharmacy or provider encounters and align low‑income subsidy rules to the new copay cap.
- Uninsured individuals who obtain inhalers from participating providers — the HHS payment program creates a pathway to subsidized inhaler access and contractual protection against balance billing beyond the capped patient share.
- Employers and plan designers using HDHPs — the safe harbor language preserves HDHP and catastrophic status for plans that exempt inhalers from deductibles, allowing continued use of tax-advantaged plan designs while complying with the statute.
- Community health centers and clinics that enroll as program‑registered providers — they can receive federal reimbursement for dispensing inhalers to uninsured patients, potentially reducing charity care burdens if reimbursement and enrollment conditions are workable.
Who Bears the Cost
- Private insurers and self‑funded ERISA plan sponsors — plans must absorb inhaler costs without applying deductibles and with only a small per‑month enrollee contribution, likely increasing plan paid drug spend and pressuring premiums or formulary strategies.
- Medicare program and taxpayers — Medicare Part B/Part D payment rules and the uninsured reimbursement program expand federal spending exposure; absent offsets, beneficiaries and taxpayers could face higher aggregate costs.
- Pharmacy benefit managers and plan administrators — they will bear systems and contract rework costs to segregate inhaler products, implement the $15 cap, adjust accumulator policies, and reprice network reimbursements.
- Providers who dispense inhalers to uninsured patients — to participate in the federal program they must accept program payment terms and forego balance billing above the capped patient share; if reimbursement rates are low or payments delayed, providers may be reluctant to participate.
- Manufacturers of high‑cost inhalers — the cap does not control list or net prices; manufacturers may face greater payer negotiation pressure, potential volume shifts, or inclusion on narrow formularies as payers seek to control cost exposure.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is immediate affordability versus systemic cost allocation: the bill guarantees low at‑the‑counter cost for inhaler‑dependent patients through a simple per‑month cap and deductible exemption, but it does so without addressing the high underlying drug and device prices that drive overall spending. Policymakers trade targeted patient relief and administrative simplicity for pressure on payers, providers, and taxpayers to absorb the difference—creating hard choices about premiums, formularies, provider participation, and future drug pricing reforms.
The bill uses a blunt, product‑based price signal — a flat capped patient share and a no‑deductible rule — rather than addressing upstream list prices, net pricing, or rebate architecture. That simplicity benefits patients at point of sale but creates a distributional consequence: payers, plan sponsors, and ultimately premiums will absorb the uncovered portion of high drug costs, which may prompt insurers to narrow formularies, prefer lower‑cost therapeutic alternatives, or increase non‑drug cost‑sharing elsewhere to offset higher pharmacy spend.
Implementation hinges on several unresolved operational details. The statutory definition relies on “medically accepted indication” language cross‑referencing existing law; determining which NDCs, HCPCS codes, or billing descriptors qualify will require administrative guidance and careful mapping across pharmacy and medical benefits.
The Medicare Part B payment change uses an atypical phrasing (payment equal to 100 percent of lesser of charge or established payment, less a fixed patient portion), which could complicate claims adjudication, provider billing, and secondary payer coordination. For the uninsured payment program, the bill leaves rate setting, claims processing rules, and provider enrollment criteria to HHS and to appropriations—uncertainty that may slow provider uptake and limit program impact.
The bill also interacts with existing commercial plan tools—step therapy, prior authorization, rebate contracting, and accumulator programs—in ways the text does not resolve. Requiring plans to count inhaler payments toward deductibles and OOP maxima restricts accumulator strategies, but the law does not expressly prohibit plans from redesigning benefit features (for example, placing alternative utilization controls or moving costs to other covered services).
Those design responses will be central to how much access improves in practice and to whether total system spending rises or shifts across payers and beneficiaries.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.