Great American Healthcare Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Burlison, Eric [R-MO-7]
- Committees
- Financial Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Aug 3, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to increase consumer-directed healthcare options, enhance price transparency across the healthcare sector, and includes provisions for expanded drug access and a significant financial policy change.
What it actually does
This bill, titled the "Great American Healthcare Act," significantly expands Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) by increasing contribution limits, broadening eligible expenses to include health insurance premiums, direct primary care, healthy food, vitamins, and fitness expenses, and providing bankruptcy protections. It also establishes "Health Marketplace Pools" to offer group health plans, strengthens price transparency requirements for hospitals, laboratories, imaging centers, and ambulatory surgical centers, and mandates greater data access for group health plans. Additionally, it introduces "expanded-access prescription drugs" that can be dispensed by non-physicians and repeals the Federal Reserve's authority to pay interest on reserve balances.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue the bill empowers consumers by giving them more control over their healthcare spending through expanded HSAs, fostering competition and lowering costs through comprehensive price transparency mandates, and improving access to certain medications by allowing non-physicians to dispense them. They would also likely tout the repeal of Federal Reserve interest payments as a measure to reduce government spending or reallocate funds.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that expanding HSAs disproportionately benefits wealthier individuals, that the price transparency mandates are overly burdensome for providers and insurers, and that allowing non-physicians to dispense expanded-access drugs could compromise patient safety. The repeal of Federal Reserve interest payments could be seen as interfering with monetary policy and potentially destabilizing financial markets.
The bill is extensive and covers diverse policy areas, requiring significant time to understand fully, likely more than typically afforded for newly introduced legislation.
Sec. 102, Title I
Increased HSA Contribution Limits
This section significantly increases the amount individuals can contribute to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) annually. It ties the new limit to the applicable dollar amount for 401(k) contributions (currently $23,000 for 2024, much higher than current HSA limits) and retains an additional catch-up contribution for those aged 50 or older. It also removes previous restrictions related to high-deductible health plans.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue it empowers individuals to save more for healthcare, promoting consumer-driven health and providing greater financial security for medical expenses.
Critics contend
Critics might argue it disproportionately benefits wealthier individuals who can afford to max out contributions, potentially exacerbating health disparities and offering larger tax benefits to higher earners.
Tradeoffs
Increased individual savings and consumer choice versus potential for greater tax benefits for higher earners and less focus on high-deductible health plans.
Sec. 103, Title I
Removal of High-Deductible Health Plan Requirement for HSAs
This section removes the requirement that an individual must be covered by a high-deductible health plan (HDHP) to be eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA). It strikes subsections (c) and (g) of IRC Section 223, which defined "eligible individual" and included rules for HDHP coverage. This fundamentally changes HSA eligibility.
Sec. 104, Title I
HSA Eligibility for Health Insurance Premiums and Direct Primary Care
This section allows Health Savings Account (HSA) funds to be used for health insurance premiums (by striking previous prohibitions) and for payments to direct primary care service arrangements. It also expands the definition of "dependent" for HSA purposes to include children up to age 27, aligning with ACA provisions.
Sec. 108, Title I
HSA Use for Wellness Expenses
This section allows Health Savings Account (HSA) funds to be used for "qualified wellness expenses," including healthy food, vitamins, dietary supplements, and sports and fitness expenses. There are monthly spending caps tied to the HSA balance: $100/month for balances up to $5,000, $150/month for balances between $5,000 and $10,000, and $200/month for balances over $10,000. It defines "healthy food" and "qualified sports and fitness expenses" with specific criteria.
Sec. 110, Title I
Employer Mandate Satisfaction via HSA Contributions
This section allows employers to satisfy the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) employer mandate by contributing at least $450 per month to an employee's Health Savings Account (HSA). Such an offer would be treated as an offer of minimum essential coverage and affordable coverage. However, the employee must be enrolled in health care coverage for the HSA contribution to be excludable from gross income.
Sec. 115 & 116, Title I
"Trump Account" Seeding and Rollovers from HSAs
These sections introduce a new type of account called a "Trump account" (defined by reference to IRC Section 530A(b), which refers to Coverdell Education Savings Accounts, but the context here is clearly for a new type of account). Section 115 allows up to $5,000 from an HSA to be transferred directly to a "Trump account" for an eligible individual without penalty. Section 116 allows the entire balance of an HSA to be rolled over to a "Trump account" upon the death of the HSA holder, also without being included in gross income.
Sec. 202, Title II
Health Marketplace Pools as "Employers" for Group Health Plans
This section amends ERISA to allow "health marketplace pools" to be deemed "employers" for the purpose of offering group health plans or group health insurance coverage. These pools must be formed in good faith to create a risk pool, cannot condition membership on health status, and must offer coverage to all members at established rates. They can offer drug coverage as a standalone benefit. The section clarifies that participation in these pools does not create an employer or joint employer relationship for other purposes.
Sec. 302, Title III
Enhanced Hospital Price Transparency
This section significantly strengthens existing hospital price transparency rules. Hospitals must monthly publish all standard charges (gross, discounted cash, payer-specific negotiated, and de-identified max/min negotiated charges) in a machine-readable format. They must also publish consumer-friendly prices for at least 300 shoppable services by 2027, expanding to all shoppable services thereafter. A senior official must attest to accuracy. Penalties for non-compliance are substantially increased, ranging from $300/day for small hospitals to $35/bed/day for large hospitals, with additional penalties for persistent noncompliance (up to $10 million). Price estimator tools do not count as compliance.
Sec. 303, Title III
Laboratory Test Price Transparency
This section mandates that clinical diagnostic laboratories publicly disclose prices for specified tests on their websites, starting July 1, 2028. This includes gross charges, discounted cash prices, payer-specific negotiated charges, and de-identified maximum/minimum negotiated charges. The information must be updated monthly and provided in a machine-readable format. Penalties for non-compliance are up to $300 per day.
Sec. 304, Title III
Imaging Services Price Transparency
This section requires providers and suppliers of specified imaging services (e.g., MRI, CT scans) to publicly disclose their prices on an internet website, starting July 1, 2028. Similar to hospitals and labs, this includes gross charges, discounted cash prices, payer-specific negotiated charges, and de-identified maximum/minimum negotiated charges, in a machine-readable format, updated annually. Non-compliance can result in civil monetary penalties of up to $300 per day.
Sec. 306, Title III
Enhanced Health Coverage Transparency and Data Access
This section significantly strengthens transparency requirements for health plans and insurers. It mandates a self-service tool providing real-time, personalized cost-sharing information for items and services, including deductibles, out-of-pocket maximums, and prior authorization requirements. It also requires monthly public disclosure of in-network rates, historical net prices for drugs, and out-of-network allowed amounts in machine-readable files. An officer must attest to accuracy, and the Secretary will audit compliance. Penalties for non-compliance are up to $300 per member per day or $10 million, whichever is less.
Sec. 307, Title III
Group Health Plan Access to Claims and Encounter Data
This section amends ERISA to require "Covered Service Providers" (including health care providers, networks, and third-party administrators) to provide group health plans with access to all claims and encounter information, medical records, and documentation supporting payments. It prohibits contract terms that limit or delay this access, restrict audit scope, or limit disclosure of pricing terms for value-based arrangements, overpayments, or administrative fees. Violations can incur a $10,000 per day civil penalty.
Sec. 310, Title III
Itemized Explanation of Benefits (EOB)
This section mandates that group health plans and insurers provide participants with an itemized Explanation of Benefits (EOB) within 45 days of receiving a payment request. The EOB must include whether the provider is in-network, a plain language description of each item/service, all billing codes, the amount the plan is paying, the patient's cost-sharing, and their progress towards deductibles/out-of-pocket maximums.
Sec. 311, Title III
Provider Requirement for Itemized Bills
This section requires healthcare providers and facilities to provide patients with a written, itemized bill for each service within 30 days of receiving final payment from a third party. The bill must include plain language descriptions, billing codes, prices, payments made by or on behalf of the individual, language assistance info, contact for questions, and charity care policies. It prohibits collection actions if the provider fails to comply or if the billed amount exceeds a good faith estimate without documented unforeseen complications or patient-initiated changes. Penalties for non-compliance are up to $10,000 per instance.
Sec. 402, Title IV
Manufacturer Rebates for Negotiated Drugs (Medicare Part B)
This section amends Medicare Part B drug pricing. It removes the previous exemption for "selected drugs" from the ASP+6 payment methodology. Instead, for selected drugs subject to maximum fair price negotiation, manufacturers must pay a rebate to the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. The rebate amount is calculated based on the difference between the ASP+6 payment amount (less coinsurance) and the MFP+6 payment amount (less coinsurance), multiplied by the number of units furnished. Beneficiary coinsurance for these drugs will be based on the MFP+6 amount. Civil monetary penalties apply for non-compliance.
Sec. 501, Title V
Expanded-Access Prescription Drugs Dispensed by Non-Physicians
This section directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a list of "expanded-access prescription drugs" (e.g., certain antibiotics, antivirals, hormonal therapies) that can be dispensed and administered by "covered individuals" (pharmacists, advanced practice registered nurses, physician assistants, etc.) after an appropriate patient assessment, consistent with Secretary-issued protocols. It preempts state laws that would prohibit or limit this, unless a state explicitly opts out.
Sec. 601, Title VI
Repeal of Federal Reserve Interest on Reserve Balances
This section repeals the authority of the Federal Reserve to pay interest on reserve balances held by depository institutions. It also makes conforming amendments to the Federal Reserve Act, including establishing an "Earnings Participation Account" for supplemental reserves.
Defines "Trump account" and "eligible individual" by cross-reference to section 530A(b) of the Internal Revenue Code. Section 530A(b) defines a "Coverdell education savings account" and "eligible student." This implies the "Trump account" is either a re-branding of a Coverdell account or a new account type with similar eligibility rules but an undefined purpose beyond the HSA rollover.
Sec. 115(D), Title I
Why it matters:This could be a tactical maneuver to introduce a new, politically branded savings vehicle without full scrutiny of its specific policy goals or to leverage an existing, less-used code section for a new purpose. The specific naming also suggests a political rather than purely technical motivation.
Case for: Proponents might argue it simplifies the creation of a new savings vehicle by leveraging existing legal definitions, providing flexibility for individuals to transfer funds for various future needs, potentially including education or other specified purposes.
Case against: Critics would argue that the lack of explicit definition within the bill for the "Trump account's" purpose, combined with the political naming, makes it opaque and potentially subject to future reinterpretation or specific targeting for political gain. The cross-reference to an education account for a general "Trump account" is confusing.
Estimated impact: Potentially significant for tax-advantaged savings and wealth transfer, depending on the ultimate scope and purpose of "Trump accounts."
Allows states to explicitly opt-out of the federal preemption regarding expanded-access prescription drugs, meaning they can continue to prohibit or limit non-physician dispensing.
Sec. 501(a), adding PHSA 503(b)(6)(E)(ii)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative compromise to address federalism concerns when enacting broad federal policy, allowing states some degree of autonomy while still establishing a federal default.
Case for: Proponents argue it respects states' rights and allows for local flexibility in healthcare regulation, ensuring that states can tailor policies to their specific needs and concerns regarding patient safety and scope of practice.
Case against: Critics might argue that it undermines the goal of nationwide expanded access to prescription drugs, creating a patchwork of regulations that could confuse patients and providers and limit the overall effectiveness of the federal policy.
Estimated impact: Varies by state; could significantly alter the reach of the expanded-access drug program.