The Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act requires health plans and insurers to cover outpatient and inpatient services tied to the diagnosis and treatment of congenital anomalies or birth defects that primarily affect the appearance or function of the eyes, ears, teeth, mouth, or jaw. It aims to close coverage gaps that often leave reconstructive and adjunctive dental services unpaid or carved out.
The bill standardizes coverage across the Public Health Service Act, ERISA, and the Internal Revenue Code, establishes notice obligations for plans, and tasks HHS with studying network adequacy and cost impacts — a package likely to shift benefit design, provider contracting, and patient out‑of‑pocket exposure for these conditions.
At a Glance
What It Does
Adds matching coverage mandates to three federal authorities (PHSA, ERISA, IRC) requiring plans and issuers to cover medically necessary reconstructive care and related services for congenital anomalies of the facial region. It allows cost‑sharing but bars cost‑sharing that is more restrictive than the plan’s predominant medical/surgical cost‑sharing and excludes surgery that is purely cosmetic and not medically determined to address a congenital defect.
Who It Affects
Group health plans (including self‑insured ERISA plans), issuers of group and individual coverage, plan sponsors and administrators, and clinicians who provide reconstructive, oral surgery, orthodontic, and prosthodontic services. State‑regulated carriers writing individual and small‑group policies will need to align benefits with the new federal floor.
Why It Matters
The measure brings dental, orthodontic, and prosthodontic adjuncts into the scope of medical coverage when tied to congenital anomalies and creates uniform federal expectations—so plans that traditionally exclude or limit those services must revisit benefits, networks, and prior‑authorization rules. The mandated HHS study also signals Congress wants data on access and cost consequences before long‑term policy changes follow.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill inserts identical coverage requirements into three places in federal law so that group plans, individual and group market issuers, and ERISA plans operate under the same floor for congenital facial defects. Coverage must extend to outpatient and inpatient items and services that are medically necessary to improve, repair, or restore body parts of the eyes, ears, teeth, mouth, or jaw — or to approximate a normal appearance or function — as determined by the treating physician.
Practically, the statute explicitly lists reconstructive procedures, treatment for complications, and 'adjunctive' dental, orthodontic, or prosthodontic support from birth until the medical or surgical treatment is complete. That language is meant to override common plan exclusions that treat dental and orthodontic care as nonmedical when those services are integral to treating a congenital condition.
The law also covers follow‑up care and treatment for secondary conditions tied to the underlying anomaly.Plans may impose cost‑sharing (coinsurance, copays, deductibles), but only up to the level of the plan’s predominant cost‑sharing for other medical and surgical benefits — a backstop that prevents plans from attaching unusually high financial barriers to these services. The bill excludes purely cosmetic surgery that reshapes normal structures to improve self‑esteem when there is no medical determination linking the procedure to a congenital anomaly.Administratively, plans and issuers must notify participants and beneficiaries about the covered benefits in plan documents beginning with plan years that the statute targets.
The Secretary of HHS must study provider network sufficiency for these services and report to Congress, including an assessment of changes in patient out‑of‑pocket spending by procedure type and whether provider capacity meets expected demand. Those implementation pieces will determine how quickly beneficiaries see services in network versus facing access or balance‑billing issues.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds PHSA section 2799A–11, ERISA section 726, and IRC section 9826, making the coverage mandate operate in parallel across those federal regimes.
Plans may apply cost‑sharing, but only so long as those cost‑sharing requirements are not more restrictive than the plan’s predominant cost‑sharing for substantially all other medical and surgical benefits.
The statutory list explicitly requires coverage of adjunctive dental, orthodontic, and prosthodontic support from birth until the medical or surgical treatment of the defect is complete, even where plans typically exclude dental care.
The law excludes cosmetic surgery that reshapes normal anatomic structures to improve appearance or self‑esteem, but only when there is no medical determination linking the surgery to a congenital anomaly.
The amendments apply for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2026.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Designates the act as the 'Ensuring Lasting Smiles Act.' Short titles carry no operative effect but make later references to the law easier in communications and regulatory guidance.
Coverage requirement for group and individual market
This new Public Health Service Act section compels group and individual market issuers to cover outpatient and inpatient services tied to congenital anomalies of the eyes, ears, teeth, mouth, or jaw. It enumerates covered categories—reconstructive services, treatment for complications, adjunctive dental/orthodontic/prosthodontic support, and follow‑up for secondary conditions—and carves out cosmetic surgery not tied to a medical determination. Practically, carriers will need to revise benefit language, prior authorization pathways, and claims adjudication rules to recognize those dental and orthodontic services as medical when tied to a covered anomaly.
Parallel obligation for ERISA plans
Mirrors the PHSA language for group and self‑insured ERISA plans so that plan sponsors and administrators managing employer plans cannot avoid the federal floor. The section also adjusts cross‑references in ERISA to add the new provision. For self‑insured plans, the mandate will be enforced through existing ERISA mechanisms (plan claims procedures and fiduciary duties), which means plan administrators must calibrate benefit booklets, internal medical necessity protocols, and vendor contracts (TPAs, stop‑loss) to accommodate the new coverage.
Tax code alignment for qualified plans
Adds a companion provision to the Internal Revenue Code so employer plan tax rules track the coverage mandate. This alignment helps ensure pre‑tax treatment of premium and plan payments for the newly covered services and reduces opportunities for tax‑based avoidance of the coverage requirement. It also signals that group health plan rules under the tax code will reflect the statutory benefit floor.
HHS study on network adequacy and cost impacts
Directs HHS to evaluate whether existing provider networks include sufficient clinicians who provide the relevant reconstructive and dental/orthodontic services and to analyze any changes in patient out‑of‑pocket costs by procedure type resulting from the mandated coverage. The study is targeted data collection — network breadth, geographic access, and per‑procedure cost changes — and will inform future oversight or rulemaking. The report deadline provides a fixed point for Congress to assess real‑world effects.
Applicability to plan years
Specifies that the statutory amendments apply to plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2026. That timing gives plan sponsors and issuers a discrete implementation window to update plan documents, update networks, and adjust administrative systems before the mandate becomes operative.
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
- Children and adults born with facial congenital anomalies (e.g., cleft lip/palate, craniofacial differences): they gain a clearer entitlement to reconstructive and integrated dental/orthodontic care that many plans previously denied.
- Families and caregivers: narrower legal grounds for denials should reduce catastrophic out‑of‑pocket spending and the need for piecemeal private funding or charity care for sequential treatments.
- Pediatric plastic, oral and maxillofacial surgeons, orthodontists, and prosthodontists: increased payer coverage is likely to expand demand for multidisciplinary care and lengthen the continuum of reimbursable services they can bill to medical coverage.
Who Bears the Cost
- Insurers and issuers writing individual and fully insured group policies: they must expand covered benefits and absorb higher claim volumes or higher average claim sizes for complex reconstructive pathways.
- Self‑insured employers and plan sponsors: as ERISA plans become subject to the same floor, sponsors may face higher medical spend and administrative burdens to integrate dental/orthodontic payments that were previously outsourced or excluded.
- Third‑party administrators, benefit managers, and dental carve‑out vendors: must retool contracts, claims flows, and medical necessity criteria to coordinate cross‑product payments and reimbursements for services that straddle medical and dental domains.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill aims to eliminate a documented coverage gap—medical denial of reconstructive and dental services for congenital facial anomalies—yet doing so forces an uncomfortable trade‑off: improved clinical access and continuity of care versus higher plan costs, contractual friction between medical and dental benefits, and potential narrowing of networks that could leave patients with in‑network coverage on paper but inadequate provider access in practice.
Two implementation challenges will determine whether the law improves access or simply shifts costs. First, the statutory trigger — services that 'primarily impact the appearance or function' of specified body parts — requires case‑by‑case clinical judgments.
Plans will need to adopt clear medical necessity criteria tied to treating physician findings; absent guidance, disputes and inconsistent denials are likely, particularly for borderline cases where dental or orthodontic work could be framed as cosmetic.
Second, bringing dental and orthodontic adjuncts into medical coverage collides with entrenched benefit designs and vendor arrangements. Many plans carve out dental entirely; others cap orthodontic lifetime benefits.
Coordinating payment responsibility, establishing accurate coding and prior‑authorization pathways, and contracting with sufficient numbers of specialists will be administratively complex and could produce short‑term access bottlenecks. Finally, the cost‑sharing ceiling—tying patient cost exposure to the plan’s predominant medical/surgical cost‑sharing—limits the most aggressive patient fees but still permits significant out‑of‑pocket liability, leaving some patients exposed unless states or regulators demand lower copays or coinsurance for these procedures.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.