This bill creates a new category of “Exchange plan HSA,” directs HHS to deposit monthly federal contributions into those accounts for adults enrolled in bronze or catastrophic Exchange plans during 2026–2027, and adjusts the tax code to accommodate those contributions. It also amends ACA rules to permit broader low‑premium plan options, appropriates funds for cost‑sharing reduction (CSR) payments with limits tied to abortion coverage, and adds definitional and funding restrictions that exclude certain gender‑transition procedures from essential health benefits and from federal Medicaid/CHIP payment.
Title II alters federal matching rules and enrollment verification for noncitizens: it offers an 80% FMAP incentive for certain states that provide benefits to non‑qualified aliens and removes guaranteed federal participation for Medicaid/CHIP claims when an enrollee’s citizenship or immigration status is not verified. Together, the measures combine subsidies, benefit‑design changes, and eligibility checks that will affect exchanges, insurers, state Medicaid programs, and providers of gender‑affirming care.
At a Glance
What It Does
Establishes Exchange plan HSAs by adding a subsection to IRC §223, prohibits rollovers into regular HSAs for these accounts, and directs HHS to deposit 1/12 of $1,000 (or $1,500 for ages 50–64) per month into eligible enrollees’ Exchange plan HSAs for months in 2026–2027. It also amends ACA provisions to restrict CSR funds from subsidizing plans that cover abortion (except rape/incest/life), expand FMAP for certain states serving non‑qualified aliens, and remove gender‑transition items from EHBs and federal Medicaid/CHIP payment eligibility.
Who It Affects
People aged 18–64 who buy bronze or catastrophic plans on an Exchange and whose household income is at or below 700% of the FPL; issuers and administrators of individual market plans and HSAs; state Medicaid and CHIP programs and their fiscal operations; and providers who furnish gender‑affirming surgeries or hormones.
Why It Matters
The bill ties direct federal HSA funding to narrow plan designs and injects new eligibility and verification burdens into Medicaid/CHIP, while changing which services receive federal payment. That combination alters incentives for consumers (toward high‑deductible plans), shifts fiscal exposure between states and the federal government, and creates immediate compliance questions for exchanges, insurers, and providers.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a specific HSA subtype—an “Exchange plan HSA”—by adding subsection (i) to IRC §223. Exchange plan HSAs are subject to two key operational rules: rollovers from Exchange‑designated HSAs to other HSAs are generally prohibited, and contributions made under this law are excluded from enrollee gross income but are not deductible elsewhere.
HHS must implement a program to make monthly deposits into these accounts during calendar years 2026 and 2027 for adults enrolled in bronze‑level or catastrophic qualified health plans on an Exchange. The deposit mechanics require Exchanges to collect identifying information at enrollment, and HHS to map those data to an enrollee’s Exchange plan HSA for direct deposit; payments for each eligible month equal 1/12 of $1,000 for ages 18–49 and 1/12 of $1,500 for ages 50–64.
Eligibility is narrowly defined. The bill borrows existing ACA income and household definitions but caps eligibility at 700% of the federal poverty level and restricts age to 18–64.
It also extends participation to eligible aliens as defined for tax credits, subject to attestation and, where applicable, verification. HHS receives $10 billion for FY2026 and $10 billion for FY2027, to be available through September 30, 2028, to fund the deposit program.
The statute authorizes the Secretary to issue regulations and requires information‑sharing adjustments in the Internal Revenue Code and tax information confidentiality provisions to allow the program to operate.Parallel to the HSA program, the bill amends several ACA provisions. It authorizes Exchange plans that do not cover certain services to be offered more widely (including adjustments to catastrophic plan eligibility and risk‑pooling rules), and it provides appropriations authority for CSR payments for plan years starting on or after 2027 while prohibiting those funds from being used for plans that cover abortion beyond narrow exceptions.
On Medicaid/CHIP, the bill (1) creates an 80% FMAP option for “specified States” that provide certain benefits or coverage to non‑qualified aliens, and (2) removes federal financial participation for Medicaid/CHIP expenditures on individuals whose citizenship, nationality, or immigration status cannot be verified, unless the State elects a limited option to continue coverage during verification. Finally, the bill amends EHB and federal payment rules to exclude a detailed list of gender‑transition surgeries, implants, and supraphysiologic hormone treatments from EHBs and from Medicaid/CHIP payment, with narrowly drawn exceptions for disorders of sex development, precocious puberty treatment, life‑threatening conditions, and certain restorative procedures.
The Five Things You Need to Know
HHS must deposit monthly federal contributions into an enrollee’s Exchange plan HSA for eligible months in 2026–2027 equal to 1/12 of $1,000 for adults 18–49 and 1/12 of $1,500 for adults 50–64.
Eligibility for the HSA deposits is limited to Exchange enrollees in bronze or catastrophic plans, aged 18–64, and with household income at or below 700% of the federal poverty level; eligible aliens may participate with attestation and verification.
The bill adds IRC §223(i) to create Exchange plan HSAs, bars most rollovers into other HSAs, and expressly treats the federal deposits as excludable from gross income (but not deductible under §223(a)).
Congress appropriates $10 billion for each of FY2026 and FY2027 to fund the HSA contribution program and authorizes further funds for CSR payments while banning CSR funds for plans that cover abortion except for rape, incest, or life‑endangering conditions.
The ACA’s essential health benefits and Medicaid/CHIP payment rules are amended to exclude a long list of gender‑transition surgeries, implants, and high‑dose hormone regimens from required benefits and from federal reimbursement, with specific medical exceptions (DSD, precocious puberty, life‑threatening illness).
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Creates 'Exchange plan HSA' and limits uses
This section inserts a new subsection into IRC §223 defining an Exchange plan HSA. Key mechanics: (1) it designates accounts at establishment, (2) prohibits rollovers from Exchange plan HSAs under most circumstances, and (3) specifies that amounts paid for abortion (with rape/incest/life exceptions) and for procedures labeled as “sex trait modification” per the cited CFR provision are not treated as medical care for HSA purposes. Practically, this changes how HSAs tied to Exchange plans interact with existing HSA rules and increases recordkeeping and coding requirements for administrators and payors to enforce the prohibited‑use rules.
HHS contribution program into Exchange plan HSAs
Directs HHS to make monthly deposits into Exchange plan HSAs for eligible enrollees for months in calendar years 2026 and 2027. The statute sets the per‑year amounts ($1,000 and $1,500 by age band), limits eligibility to bronze and catastrophic plan enrollees aged 18–64 with household income ≤700% FPL, and requires Exchanges to collect and transmit identifying data. It also treats the deposits as excludable from gross income, provides $10 billion per fiscal year for implementation, and authorizes regulations. Administrative implications: exchanges must collect Social Security numbers or other identifiers, HHS must build a payment mapping process, and tax reporting rules are amended to permit the transfers while preserving confidentiality under §6103.
CSR payments funding with abortion coverage limitation
Adds an appropriation authorization for CSR payments for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, but conditions the use of those funds so they cannot subsidize plans that include abortion coverage beyond the narrow rape/incest/life exceptions. Functionally, the change alters which qualified plans are eligible for CSR federal support and could affect insurer plan design decisions and whether issuers offer plans with abortion coverage if they rely on CSR funding.
Expands eligibility for low‑premium/catastrophic plans
Modifies ACA §1302(e) and related risk‑pool language to broaden access to lower‑premium and catastrophic options in the individual market and ensures enrollees in catastrophic plans are counted in risk pools. This change lets Exchanges offer more limited benefit designs to a wider cohort of purchasers, which will shift actuarial values and potentially affect premium subsidies and insurer participation calculations.
80% FMAP option for states assisting non‑qualified aliens
Amends SSA §1905(y) to permit an elevated federal medical assistance percentage (80%) for calendar quarters beginning on or after October 1, 2027, for states that provide certain financial assistance or comprehensive coverage to aliens who are not 'qualified aliens.' The statute defines ‘specified State’ and clarifies immigration term usage. The change is structured as an incentive: states that choose to provide state‑funded or state‑organized coverage for non‑qualified aliens can obtain a higher federal match for those expenditures, altering state budgeting calculus and potentially prompting program expansions in some jurisdictions.
Verification and federal participation for Medicaid/CHIP
Revises multiple SSA provisions to remove an automatic federal share for Medicaid/CHIP expenditures on individuals whose citizenship, nationality, or immigration status is not verified. The bill narrows the periods during which states must continue providing benefits pending verification unless the state elects a specific option to do so; it also adds parallel language to CHIP. In short, federal FFP is disallowed for claims tied to unverified status unless a state exercises an opt‑in to maintain coverage during the verification window, shifting fiscal risk to states or to the beneficiaries themselves.
Exclude gender‑transition procedures from EHBs and Medicaid/CHIP
Adds an explicit prohibition excluding items and services used for gender transition from the ACA’s essential health benefits (effective plan years beginning January 1, 2027) and amends SSA §§1903 and 1905 to bar federal payment for a detailed list of gender‑transition surgeries, implants, fat transfers, and supraphysiologic hormone regimens. The statutory text also defines narrow medical exceptions (e.g., disorders of sex development, precocious puberty treatment, life‑threatening conditions) and provides a biological definition of 'sex' for these provisions. This creates a categorical federal bar on reimbursement while leaving states and insurers to determine permissible coverage beyond the federal floor.
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
- Bronze and catastrophic plan enrollees (ages 18–64) with household income ≤700% FPL — they receive an automatic federal deposit into an Exchange‑designated HSA that can be used to lower near‑term out‑of‑pocket costs.
- Older near‑retirement consumers (ages 50–64) — receive a larger annual contribution ($1,500 instead of $1,000), which improves their capacity to pay deductibles and cost‑sharing.
- States that elect to provide coverage or state‑funded assistance to non‑qualified aliens — may access an elevated 80% FMAP for qualifying quarters, reducing net state fiscal exposure when they expand such programs.
- Issuers offering narrowly tailored, low‑premium plans — the statutory changes expanding catastrophic/low‑premium options can increase market segmentation opportunities and attract price‑sensitive enrollees.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal Treasury — appropriates $10 billion for FY2026 and $10 billion for FY2027 plus unspecified amounts for CSR payments, raising near‑term federal outlays tied to the new HSA deposit program and CSR funding rules.
- Providers of gender‑affirming care and suppliers of related devices — will lose federal reimbursement for many listed surgeries, implants, and hormone regimens when treating Medicaid/CHIP beneficiaries and face narrower commercial coverage demand where EHB exclusions influence plan design.
- State Medicaid/CHIP programs and exchanges — face increased administrative burden to implement enrollee verification changes, to determine whether to elect the limited option to continue coverage during verification, and to operationalize HHS deposit mechanics and reporting changes.
- Insurers that include abortion coverage in qualified plans and rely on CSR funding — may be unable to access CSR appropriations under the bill’s prohibition, creating a financial disincentive to offer abortion‑inclusive plans.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between two legitimate policy goals that work at cross purposes: incentivizing cheaper, choice‑oriented private coverage through federal HSA contributions and minimalist plan options, versus preserving access to a set of health services (abortion and gender‑affirming care) and maintaining federal fiscal support for low‑income and noncitizen populations; the bill reduces federal spending for certain services while simultaneously increasing federal subsidies directed into high‑deductible accounts, creating winners and losers without a straightforward policy equilibrium.
The bill stitches together tax, Exchange, and entitlement law in a way that raises several operational and policy tensions. First, routing federal dollars into HSAs tied to bronze and catastrophic plans may lower displayed premiums but shifts cost risk to consumers through higher deductibles; whether that reduces total spending or simply increases uncompensated care depends on enrollee behavior and provider pricing responses.
Second, the prohibition on rollovers and the narrow exclusion of certain services from HSA‑qualified medical expenditures require new coding, vendor processes, and potentially litigation over what treatment qualifies — especially where clinical indications overlap with the statute’s exceptions (e.g., DSD, life‑threatening conditions).
On Medicaid/CHIP, removing federal participation for unverified individuals shifts financial pressure to states and to low‑income immigrants. The bill does offer a targeted 80% FMAP for states that choose to provide benefits to non‑qualified aliens, but the definition of “specified State” and the mechanics for claiming the higher match will create implementation complexity and could prompt divergent state choices.
Excluding gender‑transition procedures from EHBs and federal payment raises parity and anti‑discrimination questions; insurers and providers will test how the federal exclusion interacts with state mandates, ERISA‑governed plans, and medical‑necessity standards. Finally, the CSR funding prohibition for plans covering abortion will likely change plan menus on Exchanges and could create coverage gaps for people who rely on CSR reductions.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.