A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 634.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "PBM Kickback Prohibition Act," aims to amend section 408 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The primary goal is to prohibit kickbacks to pharmacy benefit managers. It specifically targets compensation paid by service providers for various activities related to business referrals, renewals, or contracting processes. The act establishes that the characterization of compensation should be based on economic substance rather than just how it is labeled. Additionally, it creates a presumption regarding compensation paid to brokers or consultants.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +6
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill prohibits kickbacks to pharmacy benefit managers to ensure more transparent and fair business practices in the healthcare sector.
- Scored +5
Does this lower the price of prescription medicines?
By prohibiting kickbacks for business referrals and renewals, the bill aims to prevent hidden costs from being passed down through pharmacy benefit management.
- Scored +3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Reducing hidden pharmacy kickbacks can help lower overall healthcare and prescription costs for low-income families.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Prohibition of illegal compensation: Under Section 2(a)(I), the bill prohibits service providers from paying compensation for the referral, recommendation, or retention of business, which aims to stop specific types of payments related to how covered plans handle their business.
-
Focus on economic reality: Per Section 2(a)(II), the bill requires that compensation be judged by its "economic substance and practical operation" rather than its label, which helps ensure that the true nature of a financial arrangement is transparent.
-
Increased accountability for brokers and consultants: Section 2(a)(III) creates a presumption that compensation paid to entities like brokers or advisors is related to prohibited activities unless they can provide written proof that the pay reflects fair market value for actual services.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Increased burden of proof for service providers: Under Section 2(a)(III), any compensation paid to a brokerage firm, broker, consultant, or advisor is presumed to be related to prohibited activities unless the parties can demonstrate through "contemporaneous written documentation" that the payment is for fair market value and unrelated to the prohibited activities.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Reducing hidden pharmacy kickbacks can help lower overall healthcare and prescription costs for low-income families. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The prohibition of undisclosed compensation in pharmacy management may help stabilize healthcare costs for middle-income families.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill prohibits kickbacks to pharmacy benefit managers to ensure more transparent and fair business practices in the healthcare sector.
- Healthcare
- Does this lower the price of prescription medicines? — By prohibiting kickbacks for business referrals and renewals, the bill aims to prevent hidden costs from being passed down through pharmacy benefit management.
- 7/2/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-729.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 634.
- 5/21/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 34 - 0.
- 3/12/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- Introduced in House