Tennessee House Bill HB1955

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/26
• Refer: 2/4/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 56, Chapter 7, Part 31 and Title 56, Chapter 7, Part 32, relative to pharmacy benefits managers.

Summary

HB1955 requires the Tennessee Commissioner of Commerce and Insurance to use existing resources to prepare a report by October 1, 2026, on reported violations of Tennessee Code Annotated § 56-7-3124 involving pharmacy benefits managers (PBMs) during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026. The report must include the number of violations reported, the commissioner’s findings from any investigations, and any penalties imposed on PBMs found to have violated the statute. The commissioner must submit the report to legislative clerks and the legislative librarian, and the report may be delivered electronically. The bill does not create a new regulatory program or change the underlying PBM standards directly; instead, it adds a transparency and oversight requirement tied to existing PBM law. Its practical effect is to document enforcement activity under the current statute and provide the General Assembly with information about complaints, investigations, and penalties related to PBM conduct.

Impact

HB1955 amends Tennessee law in Title 56, Chapters 7, Parts 31 and 32 by adding a one-time reporting requirement for the Department of Commerce and Insurance concerning alleged violations of § 56-7-3124. It affects pharmacy benefits managers by increasing public and legislative visibility into enforcement actions, but it does not itself impose new substantive duties or penalties on PBMs. The bill primarily impacts the commissioner’s reporting obligations and the legislature’s access to enforcement data.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears administrative and oversight-focused rather than controversial, suggesting a generally neutral or procedural posture. The absence of recorded votes or discussion prevents a more specific assessment of sentiment.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is whether the reporting mandate is necessary or burdensome, particularly because the commissioner must use existing resources rather than receive additional funding. Another possible issue is the scope of transparency into PBM enforcement, since the report would publicize violations, investigations, and penalties involving pharmacy benefits managers. However, no specific objections, amendments, or opposing arguments are included in the provided record.