A Republican bill with 12 Democratic cosponsors · See all 27 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The PBM Price Transparency and Accountability Act aims to amend the Social Security Act to increase transparency and oversight in pharmacy drug pricing. It establishes a monthly survey for Medicaid to determine national average drug acquisition costs for retail and non-retail pharmacies. The bill prohibits "spread pricing" in Medicaid by requiring a transparent pass-through pricing model. For Medicare, it mandates that drug plans use reasonable and relevant contract terms and provides for the tracking of "essential retail pharmacies." Finally, it increases accountability for Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) through stricter compensation rules and expanded reporting requirements.
Yes· 3 of 13
- Scored +7
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill mandates various public reports and data availability regarding pharmacy pricing and PBM practices.
- Scored +6
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
The bill enhances pharmacy choice and price transparency for Medicare beneficiaries.
- Scored +6
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The bill creates a specific category of 'essential retail pharmacies' to protect underserved rural areas.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Medicaid Price Accuracy: The bill requires the Secretary to conduct monthly surveys of drug prices for retail and non-schedules pharmacies to determine national average acquisition costs, which helps ensure accurate payments to pharmacies. (Section 2(a)(1)(A))
-
Elimination of Abusive Pricing: By requiring a transparent pass-through pricing model, the bill prevents "spread pricing" where entities charge more than they pay to the pharmacy. (Section 2(b)(1)(A))
-
Improved Pharmacy Choice in Medicare: The bill requires drug plan sponsors to permit any pharmacy that meets standard contract terms to participate in their network, ensuring more options for beneficiaries. (Section 3(a)(1)(A)(i))
-
Protection for Local Pharmacies: The creation of "essential retail pharmacies" helps track and protect pharmacies located in rural, suburban, or urban areas that may be underserved. (Section 3(a)(2))
-
Enhanced PBM Accountability: Pharmacy Benefit Managers are prohibited from deriving income from anything other than bona fide service fees, which helps ensure they operate transparently. (Section 3(b)(1)(A)(i))
-
Greater Transparency for Beneficiaries: The bill mandates detailed annual reports regarding drug costs, rebates, and pharmacy reimbursements to provide clarity on how drug spending affects enrollees. (Section 3(b)(1)(C)(i))
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Financial Penalties for Pharmacies: Retail and non-retail pharmacies may face civil money penalties of up to $100,000 for failing to respond to price surveys or providing false information. (Section 2(a)(1)(H)(iii)(I))
-
Increased Administrative Burden: Pharmacies are required to respond to monthly surveys regarding their pricing and drug acquisition costs. (Section 2(a)(1)(F))
-
Potential Litigation and Investigation Costs: The Secretary is granted the authority to investigate allegations of unfair contract terms, which could lead to legal scrutiny for drug plan sponsors. (Section 3(a)(3)(A)(ii))
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 people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill creates a specific category of 'essential retail pharmacies' to protect underserved rural areas. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — The bill enhances pharmacy choice and price transparency for Medicare beneficiaries. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill aims to stabilize and clarify pricing for medications used by Medicaid recipients. Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill protects pharmacies from unfair contracting practices and spread pricing. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Improved drug pricing transparency and pharmacy access may benefit veterans enrolled in Medicare programs.
- Healthcare
- Does this lower the price of prescription medicines? — The bill targets drug pricing transparency and prohibits spread pricing to lower costs for consumers. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The bill improves pharmacy access by requiring drug plans to permit any pharmacy meeting standard contract terms to participate in their network. Does this put more money into Medicaid, the health coverage for people on low incomes? — The bill allocates resources for surveys to ensure accurate drug pricing and payments within the Medicaid program. Does this put more money into Medicare, the health coverage for people over 65? — The bill directs significant funding toward oversight and studies of Medicare drug pricing and PBM practices.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill implements price transparency and prohibits spread pricing, which may reduce federal outlays for Medicaid and Medicare. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill protects smaller pharmacies by preventing abusive pricing and ensuring they can participate in networks based on reasonable terms.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates various public reports and data availability regarding pharmacy pricing and PBM practices.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — By targeting drug costs through Medicaid and Medicare, the bill may reduce financial burdens on low-income households.
- 8/7/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/28/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/5/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/16/2025
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 12/4/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 20 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Marsha BlackburnRepublican · Tennessee
John BarrassoRepublican · Wyoming
Michael BennetDemocrat · Colorado
Lisa Blunt RochesterDemocrat · Delaware
Shelley CapitoRepublican · West Virginia
John CornynRepublican · Texas
Bill CassidyRepublican · Louisiana
Catherine Cortez MastoDemocrat · Nevada
Steve DainesRepublican · Montana
Chuck GrassleyRepublican · Iowa
Martin HeinrichDemocrat · New Mexico
Maggie HassanDemocrat · New Hampshire
Ben LujánDemocrat · New Mexico
James LankfordRepublican · Oklahoma
Roger MarshallRepublican · Kansas
David McCormickRepublican · Pennsylvania
James RischRepublican · Idaho
Tim ScottRepublican · South Carolina
Tina SmithDemocrat · Minnesota
John ThuneRepublican · South Dakota
Thomas TillisRepublican · North Carolina
Ron WydenDemocrat · Oregon
Raphael WarnockDemocrat · Georgia
Peter WelchDemocrat · Vermont
Sheldon WhitehouseDemocrat · Rhode Island
Mark WarnerDemocrat · Virginia
Todd YoungRepublican · Indiana