Ohio House Bill HB709

Ohio 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/24/26

Caption

To amend section 3902.30 of the Revised Code to require private insurers to cover telehealth services for mental health services the same as for in-person mental health services.

Summary

HB709 would amend Ohio Revised Code section 3902.30 to require health benefit plans offered by private insurers to cover telehealth services on the same basis and to the same extent as comparable in-person health care services, with a specific focus on mental health care. The bill states that coverage must include outpatient mental health services and other mental health services as defined in state law, and it bars insurers from denying coverage solely because a service is delivered by telehealth. The bill also requires insurers to reimburse covered telehealth services, but it does not set a required reimbursement rate equal to in-person care. It prohibits higher cost-sharing for telehealth than for comparable in-person services, and it limits annual or lifetime benefit caps on telehealth to the same caps that apply to all benefits under the plan. The bill further clarifies that it does not require coverage for asynchronous communication beyond what a plan already covers, and it authorizes the superintendent of insurance to adopt implementing rules.

Impact

If enacted, HB709 would expand and standardize telehealth parity requirements in Ohio’s insurance code by expressly applying them to mental health services in private health benefit plans. It would affect health plan issuers, insurers, covered individuals, and health care professionals by requiring coverage and cost-sharing treatment for telehealth mental health services to match in-person services, while preserving insurer discretion over reimbursement amounts and not mandating equal payment rates. The bill would amend and replace existing section 3902.30 of the Revised Code and give the Department of Insurance rulemaking authority to implement the new requirements.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the available record suggests a generally supportive policy approach toward telehealth access, especially for mental health care. The bill’s sponsors and cosponsors indicate legislative interest in expanding access and reducing barriers for patients who use telehealth. No contrary sentiment is documented in the provided materials, but the structure of the bill reflects an effort to balance expanded coverage with insurer concerns about reimbursement levels and scope of coverage.

Contention

The main points of contention are likely to be cost and payment parity. The bill requires coverage and limits higher patient cost-sharing for telehealth, but it explicitly says insurers are not required to reimburse telehealth providers at the same rate as in-person services, which may be a compromise point for insurers and providers. Another possible issue is the bill’s treatment of asynchronous communication: it does not require coverage for it unless already covered under the plan, which may limit some telehealth advocates’ goals. No formal objections or recorded disputes are included in the provided committee or vote history.