The PBM FAIR Act amends ERISA to treat pharmacy benefit managers as fiduciaries when they perform certain roles for group health plans, including maintaining networks or formularies and negotiating price concessions. It also requires explicit disclosures of compensation related to PBM services, clarifies who bears fiduciary responsibility, and prohibits indemnification for fiduciary breaches.
The changes apply to plan years beginning at least 12 months after enactment, signaling a tighter governance regime for PBMs and plan sponsors alike.
Why it matters: for ERISA health plans, the bill heightens accountability for PBMs and other service providers, potentially improving price transparency and aligning incentives with plan participants. It also creates new liability and governance requirements, which could affect PBM business models, plan administration costs, and how employers monitor and contract with PBMs.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill deems PBMs as ERISA fiduciaries through a new 3(21)(C) clause, extending fiduciary duties to those who maintain drug networks, formularies, or negotiate price concessions for a group health plan. It also requires detailed compensation disclosures from PBMs and related service providers and restricts indemnification for fiduciary breaches. A clarifying provision designates when the PBM sponsor may serve as the responsible plan fiduciary.
Who It Affects
ERISA-covered group health plans, PBMs, third-party administrators, plan sponsors, and health insurers offering group coverage. Also relevant are entities involved in prescription drug networks, formularies, and rebate structures, including GPOs and other intermediaries that influence price and payment flows.
Why It Matters
This marks a shift in who is accountable for drug-benefit decisions by plans, aiming to curb misaligned incentives and raise visibility into compensation. For compliance officers and plan fiduciaries, it creates new reporting duties and liability standards that affect vendor management, contract terms, and oversight.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The act updates ERISA to treat certain PBM activities as fiduciary functions. Section 1 simply provides the bill’s short title.
Section 2(a) adds a new 3(21)(C) fiduciary definition, making a person or entity a fiduciary if they maintain a prescription drug network or formulary for a group health plan, or if they engage in negotiating rebates, processing claims, or performing utilization review on behalf of the plan. In practical terms, this means PBMs and related entities could be legally responsible for prudent management of a plan’s drug benefits, not just for administrative tasks.
Section 2(b) expands disclosure requirements. It requires plan service providers to disclose compensation tied to PBM activities—both direct and indirect—associated with drug networks, formularies, or purchases from manufacturers or distributors.
The idea is to shine a light on price-concession structures so plan fiduciaries can assess whether rebates or discounts align with the best interests of plan participants. A closely related provision covers third-party administrators and similar entities involved in administering plan services.Section 2(c) clarifies who is the responsible plan fiduciary when a PBM sponsors a plan for its own employees.
This helps avoid ambiguity about where accountability resides if multiple parties touch plan benefits. Section 2(d) prohibits indemnification for fiduciary breaches; essentially, a party deemed fiduciary may not be contractually shielded from liability.
A technical tweak in Section 2(e) fixes cross-references in ERISA statute language. Finally, Section 2(f) sets an effective date: the amendments apply to plan years beginning 12 months after enactment, giving sponsors time to adjust governance and contracts.Taken together, the bill shifts risk and responsibility toward PBMs and the originating plan fiduciaries, while insisting on greater transparency about the money moving through drug-benefit operations.
For plan sponsors, this is a governance and compliance project with potential cost implications but clearer benchmarks for fiduciary behavior.
The Five Things You Need to Know
PBMs become ERISA fiduciaries for group health plans when they maintain networks/formularies or handle price negotiations and claims.
Disclosures are required for compensation tied to PBM services, including indirect and direct payments and arrangements through networks or formularies.
A PBM sponsor can be the responsible plan fiduciary for its own employee plan, clarifying accountability.
Indemnification of fiduciaries for breaches is prohibited, and contracts cannot shield fiduciaries from liability.
The amendments apply to plan years beginning at least 12 months after enactment.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Section 1 provides the formal name PBM Fiduciary Accountability, Integrity, and Reform (FAIR) Act. It signals the bill’s focus on elevating PBM oversight within ERISA-driven health plans and sets the stage for the substantive fiduciary provisions that follow.
Deeming PBMs as ERISA fiduciaries
Section 2(a) adds a new 3(21)(C) clause to ERISA, deeming PBMs fiduciaries for group health plans if they maintain prescription drug networks or formularies, or engage in activities like negotiating rebates, processing claims, or performing utilization review. Practically, PBMs would be subject to the duties of prudence and loyalty in those activities, aligning their incentives with plan participants.
Disclosures of compensation from PBM services
Section 2(b) expands the 408(b)(2)(B)(ii)(I)(bb) disclosure regime to require plan service providers to reveal compensation related to PBM activities, including network/formulary arrangements and drug purchases. The goal is to illuminate profit streams tied to drug benefit management so fiduciaries can assess value and conflicts of interest.
Clarification of responsible plan fiduciary
Section 2(c) clarifies which party is the responsible fiduciary when a PBM sponsors a plan for its own employees. It confirms that, in such cases, the PBM can be the responsible fiduciary, helping resolve governance questions in nested or affiliated arrangements.
Indemnification prohibition
Section 2(d) prohibits indemnification for fiduciary breaches. No fiduciary may be relieved of liability by contract or agreement, reinforcing the personal and institutional accountability of those who hold fiduciary duties under ERISA.
Technical amendment
Section 2(e) makes a small but important cross-reference correction in ERISA language, ensuring the new fiduciary framework is coherent with the existing statutory structure.
Effective date
Section 2(f) provides that the amendments apply to plan years beginning 12 months after enactment, creating a defined runway for plans and PBMs to adjust governance, disclosures, and contract terms.
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
- ERISA-covered plan participants and beneficiaries gain from clearer oversight of PBMs and more transparent pricing and compensation arrangements.
- Plan sponsors and fiduciaries receive a well-defined framework for monitoring PBM activities and enforcing prudent practices.
- Employers and unions sponsoring group health plans benefit from improved governance and potential cost containment through transparency.
- Federal regulators (e.g., Department of Labor) gain clearer standards for enforcement related to PBM activities and disclosures.
Who Bears the Cost
- PBMs face expanded fiduciary duties, increased liability exposure, and new disclosure obligations.
- Third-party administrators and similar service providers may incur new fiduciary duties and reporting requirements.
- ERISA plan sponsors may experience higher compliance and administrative costs to implement the new disclosures and governance practices.
- Some health plans or networks could experience changes in contracting or formulary design as disclosure requirements influence negotiations.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The core dilemma is balancing stronger fiduciary accountability and price transparency with the potential for higher administrative costs and constraining practical flexibility in drug-benefit management. While tighter oversight can curb misaligned incentives, it may also complicate PBM operations and plan negotiations, raising questions about access, formulary design, and overall plan affordability.
The bill’s approach tightens the behavioral expectations for PBMs and related service providers by elevating their role to fiduciary status and mandating transparent compensation disclosures. This creates a governance framework intended to align PBM incentives with plan participants’ interests, but it also raises practical questions about enforcement, mapping existing contracts to fiduciary duties, and the potential for increased legal risk for both PBMs and plan sponsors.
Plans will need to adjust vendor management practices, review indemnification language, and strengthen due-diligence processes to ensure compliance with the new disclosure and accountability standards. A central tension remains: pushing for greater transparency and fiduciary accountability may raise short-term costs and compliance complexity while delivering longer-term protections against conflicts of interest and price concessions that do not serve participants.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.