Medicare Supplement Policies - Issuance - Requirements
HB 275, enacted as Chapter 139, expands the circumstances under which insurers that sell Medicare supplement policies in Maryland must issue coverage. In addition to existing guaranteed-issue protections tied to initial Medicare Part B enrollment and certain federal special enrollment periods, the bill requires carriers to offer Medicare supplement coverage to two new groups: individuals who were enrolled in Medicare Part B while enrolled in the Maryland Medical Assistance Program and who apply within 63 days after losing Medicaid coverage, and individuals who qualify for a federal special enrollment period guaranteed-issue right and apply within 63 days of that qualifying event. Applicants must provide evidence of the relevant termination, disenrollment, or qualifying event.
The bill also preserves and restates Maryland’s existing rules for people under age 65 who qualify for Medicare because of disability, including the requirement that carriers make Medicare supplement plans A and D available to those individuals during specified enrollment windows and without health-based underwriting. It continues the rule that plan A premiums for disabled enrollees under 65 may not exceed the average premium paid by policyholders age 65 and older for that plan form. In addition, the bill keeps in place the birthday rule, under which carriers must offer certain equal-or-lower-benefit replacement Medicare supplement policies during the 30 days after an insured’s birthday, and requires advance notice of that right.
The bill’s impact is to broaden guaranteed-issue access to Medicare supplement policies and limit insurers’ ability to deny, condition, or price coverage based on health status for the newly covered enrollment categories. It amends Insurance Article § 15-909(b), adding new mandatory issuance obligations for carriers operating in Maryland and reinforcing consumer protections for Medicare beneficiaries, especially those transitioning off Medicaid or using special enrollment rights. The act takes effect July 1, 2026.
Overall sentiment appears supportive and consumer-protective. The bill was approved by the Governor and became law, and the text reflects a policy goal of improving access to supplemental Medicare coverage for vulnerable beneficiaries rather than restricting it. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no evidence of formal opposition in the available materials.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided record. The main policy issues implicit in the bill are the balance between expanded coverage access for Medicare beneficiaries and the added obligations on carriers to issue policies during additional guaranteed-issue periods, but no named opponents or debated amendments are available in the context provided.
HB 275 amends Maryland Insurance Article § 15-909(b) to require carriers that issue Medicare supplement policies to offer coverage in additional guaranteed-issue situations, including for certain individuals transitioning from the Maryland Medical Assistance Program and for individuals qualifying under federal special enrollment period guaranteed-issue rights. It also preserves existing protections for disabled Medicare beneficiaries under age 65 and the birthday-rule replacement coverage provisions, while maintaining limits on health-based underwriting and premium discrimination in the specified circumstances.
The available record suggests a favorable, consumer-oriented sentiment. The bill was enacted into law and appears designed to expand access to Medicare supplement coverage for beneficiaries with limited enrollment opportunities, particularly those leaving Medicaid or qualifying through special enrollment rights. No committee debate or vote record was provided, so there is no documented opposition or split sentiment in the supplied materials.
No specific contention is documented in the provided materials. The likely policy tension is between broader guaranteed-issue access for Medicare beneficiaries and the compliance and underwriting constraints placed on insurers, but the record does not identify any legislators, stakeholders, or amendments arguing against the bill.