Kansas House Bill HB2550

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/27/26
• Refer: 1/27/26
• Refer: 2/19/26

Caption

Requiring certain 340B entities to report annually to the Kansas department of insurance on certain costs, savings and payments made under the federal 340B drug pricing program.

Summary

HB 2550 would require Kansas hospitals that participate in the federal 340B drug pricing program to submit annual reports to the Kansas Department of Insurance beginning January 1, 2027. The reports would have to describe how 340B savings are used to benefit the community, estimate annual savings by comparing 340B acquisition costs to group purchasing organization pricing or another commissioner-approved benchmark, compare savings to total drug expenditures, and explain the hospital’s internal compliance and oversight practices. The bill applies to hospitals, including rural hospitals, that are 340B entities. In addition to narrative information, the bill requires hospitals to provide detailed financial and operational data, including acquisition costs, payments received, payments to contract pharmacies and other program managers, other program expenses, and claim counts. Much of the data must be broken out by payor type, and certain drug-cost information must also be reported at the national drug code level for the 50 most frequently dispensed drugs, including physician-administered and physician-dispensed drugs. The Department of Insurance must post each hospital’s report on its website and also publish an aggregate summary report. The commissioner of insurance is authorized to adopt rules and regulations to implement the act. The bill’s impact on state law would be to create a new state reporting and public-disclosure regime for 340B hospitals in Kansas, adding oversight by the Department of Insurance over a federal drug pricing program. It would not change the federal 340B program itself, but it would require covered hospitals to collect, organize, and disclose information that is not currently required under state law, and it would make that information publicly available. Because no committee transcript or vote record was provided, there is no documented legislative debate or recorded sentiment to summarize from the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears aimed at transparency and accountability in how hospitals use 340B savings, while potentially increasing administrative burden and public scrutiny for participating hospitals and their contract pharmacy arrangements. Notable points of potential contention include the scope of the required financial disclosures, the requirement to report payments to contract pharmacies and third-party administrators, and the public posting of hospital-specific data. Hospitals and 340B entities may view the bill as burdensome or as exposing sensitive operational information, while supporters would likely emphasize transparency, community benefit, and oversight of savings generated through the 340B program.

Impact

HB 2550 would add a new Kansas reporting and public-disclosure requirement for hospitals participating in the federal 340B drug pricing program, with oversight by the Kansas Department of Insurance. Covered hospitals would have to submit detailed annual information on savings, drug acquisition costs, payments to contract pharmacies and other entities, claim counts, and compliance practices, and the department would publish both individual reports and an aggregate summary online. The bill would therefore create new state-law obligations for 340B hospitals and rural hospitals that participate in the program, while authorizing the insurance commissioner to adopt implementing rules.

Sentiment

No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment to rely on. From the bill’s structure, the measure appears to be framed as a transparency and accountability bill, suggesting likely support from lawmakers interested in public reporting of 340B savings and community benefits. At the same time, the detailed reporting requirements suggest likely concern from hospitals and other 340B participants about administrative burden, compliance costs, and disclosure of sensitive financial information.

Contention

The main points of contention are likely to be the breadth and specificity of the required disclosures, especially the reporting of acquisition costs, payments, claim counts, and drug-level data by payor type. Hospitals may object to the administrative burden and to public posting of facility-specific information, while supporters may argue that the public should know how 340B savings are used and whether the program is benefiting patients and communities. Another likely issue is the inclusion of contract pharmacies and third-party program managers in the reporting requirements, which could raise concerns about operational complexity and confidentiality.