SB2641, the "Health Care Freedom and Choice Act," is a single‑purpose bill: it declares that the final interagency rule titled “Short‑Term, Limited‑Duration Insurance and Independent, Noncoordinated Excepted Benefits Coverage” (89 Fed. Reg. 23338, Apr. 3, 2024) shall have no force or effect.
The bill names the three agencies that issued the rule — the Internal Revenue Service, the Employee Benefits Security Administration, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services — and nullifies that rule by statute.
That move would eliminate the federal regulatory framework created by the 2024 rule, but the text does not replace it, direct alternative agency action, or address how contracts, enforcement actions, or state rules should be treated. For compliance officers, insurers, and plan sponsors, the measure creates immediate regulatory uncertainty about the status of short‑term limited‑duration insurance (STLDI) and noncoordinated excepted benefits at the federal level and shifts attention to litigation risk, agency responses, and state regulatory regimes.
At a Glance
What It Does
SB2641 voids a specific final interagency rule (89 Fed. Reg. 23338) governing short‑term limited‑duration insurance and independent, noncoordinated excepted benefits by declaring the rule to have "no force or effect." The statute does not amend the underlying statutes that authorize agency rulemaking nor direct replacement regulations.
Who It Affects
The bill affects federal regulators (IRS, EBSA, CMS), health insurers and brokers that issue or market STLDI and excepted‑benefit products, employers that design benefits packages, and consumers who buy alternative or limited‑benefit plans. State insurance regulators and ACA‑compliant carriers will also face secondary effects.
Why It Matters
Nullifying the rule removes a federal-level regulatory clarification or constraint and reopens the practical and legal questions about how STLDI and certain excepted benefits will be classified and regulated. That change matters for market design, consumer protections, and the risk pools that underlie ACA-compliant coverage.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill is short and specific: it gives a statutory command that the final interagency rule published at 89 Fed. Reg. 23338 on April 3, 2024 — the joint IRS, EBSA and CMS rule concerning short‑term, limited‑duration insurance and certain excepted benefits — shall have no force or effect.
In plain terms, Congress would be erasing that rule from the federal regulatory landscape by statute rather than by requiring the agencies to rescind it through new rulemaking.
Because SB2641 contains no implementing language, it does not tell agencies whether to take further administrative steps, nor does it provide guidance about ongoing enforcement actions, pending marketplace decisions, or existing plan contracts that were written or interpreted under the rescinded rule. That silence creates immediate practical questions: insurers and sellers that relied on the rule will have to assess whether previously issued policies remain lawful, and agencies will decide whether to litigate, reissue guidance, or promulgate replacement rules.The bill also narrows the federal regulatory posture without altering the statutes that authorize agency action.
States retain independent authority over insurance markets and may continue to adopt or enforce their own standards for STLDI and excepted benefits. In many states, those state regimes will determine market behavior unless agencies respond with new federal rules or enforcement priorities.Finally, the legislative nullification changes the legal battleground.
Rather than an agency choosing to rescind a rule under the Administrative Procedure Act, Congress would be directly declaring the rule ineffective; that approach raises predictable disputes over retroactivity, reliance interests, and the interaction with state law. Those disputes — and how the agencies react — will shape whether the bill's practical effect is immediate market change or months of litigation and administrative follow‑up.
The Five Things You Need to Know
SB2641 explicitly targets the interagency final rule published at 89 Fed. Reg. 23338 (April 3, 2024) and directs that that rule "shall have no force or effect.", The bill names the three issuing agencies — the Internal Revenue Service, the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) — but contains no instructions to those agencies to issue new rules or guidance.
SB2641 contains no language addressing retroactivity, contract validity, pending enforcement actions, or the treatment of benefits already issued under the 2024 rule.
The statute does not repeal or amend the underlying statutory authorities that enable federal regulation of STLDI and excepted benefits; it negates a particular rule only.
Because the bill is a statutory nullification rather than administrative rescission, it raises predictable legal issues (reliance, retroactivity, preemption) and transfers decision points to the courts, the agencies, and state regulators.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This single‑line section gives the bill its name, the "Health Care Freedom and Choice Act." It has no operative effect beyond providing a caption for citation and reference.
Nullification of the interagency rule on STLDI and excepted benefits
This is the operative provision. The section declares that the named final interagency rule — identified by title and Federal Register citation (89 Fed. Reg. 23338, Apr. 3, 2024) — "shall have no force or effect." Practically, that statement would remove the federal rule from the set of binding regulations. The provision does not specify an effective date beyond the statute's enactment, does not order the agencies to take any administrative steps (such as publishing a rescission), and does not set transitional rules for contracts, benefit designs, or regulatory filings made while the rule was in force.
What the bill does not do
Although not drafted as a separate statutory section, the bill's text implies several limits. It does not repeal the underlying statutory grant of authority that enabled the agencies to issue the 2024 rule; it does not alter state insurance law authority; and it does not create an alternative federal regulatory framework. Those absences mean the practical aftermath depends on agency choices and state responses rather than on new federal regulatory instructions in the statute itself.
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
- Insurers and producers of short‑term limited‑duration insurance (STLDI) and independent excepted‑benefit products — they regain the regulatory posture that existed before the 2024 rule and face fewer federal constraints specific to that rule.
- Brokers and agents selling limited‑duration and excepted benefits products — reduced federal regulation can simplify product offerings and compliance obligations tied specifically to the rescinded rule.
- Some consumers seeking lower‑cost, narrow‑coverage plans — nullification can expand availability and choice among short‑term and excepted‑benefit options that had been restricted or clarified by the 2024 rule.
Who Bears the Cost
- Consumers with preexisting conditions or those who rely on comprehensive coverage — broader availability of limited‑benefit alternatives can increase adverse selection and destabilize ACA risk pools, potentially raising premiums for comprehensive plans.
- ACA‑compliant insurers and market‑rate carriers — risk pool dilution and competitive pressure from lower‑cost, less‑comprehensive products may increase actuarial and pricing uncertainty.
- Federal agencies (IRS, EBSA, CMS) and state insurance regulators — agencies may incur litigation, be forced to issue new guidance or rules, and states may see increased administrative workloads responding to filings and consumer complaints.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between restoring broader consumer choice and market flexibility for limited‑benefit plans, on the one hand, and preserving stable, comprehensive insurance markets and consumer protections on the other: nullifying a federal rule can expand narrow, lower‑cost options quickly, but it also risks harming consumers who need comprehensive coverage and destabilizing ACA risk pools — a trade‑off with no administratively neat solution.
SB2641 is a narrowly drawn statutory nullification that resolves one question — the legal force of a particular interagency final rule — but leaves many practical questions unanswered. The bill does not say what happens to policies sold or approved under the vacated rule, whether agencies should vacate enforcement actions taken pursuant to that rule, or how to address consumer protections that the rule sought to clarify.
Those omissions create short‑term market uncertainty: insurers must decide how to price and design products while regulators decide whether to pursue litigation, issue interim guidance, or propose new rules.
The nullification also invites jurisdictional and legal disputes. Because the bill acts by statute rather than through administrative rescission, parties may litigate issues of retroactivity, reliance interests (for issuers and consumers who structured behavior around the 2024 rule), and the interplay with state regulatory standards.
Agencies retain their statutory authority to regulate STLDI and excepted benefits; they can choose to promulgate replacement rules using notice‑and‑comment procedures, but that process takes time and may produce different outcomes. The net result could be a period of regulatory limbo with uneven state responses, litigation, and market adjustments rather than an immediate, uniform policy shift.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.