The PBM Disclosure Act would amend ERISA’s prohibited transaction disclosure rules for employer-sponsored health plans to make clear that brokers and consultants must disclose compensation tied to pharmacy benefit management services and related third-party administration services. Specifically, it adds pharmacy benefit management services and related services provided by PBMs, third-party administrators, or similar entities to the list of services for which direct or indirect compensation must be disclosed when a covered service provider reasonably expects to receive such compensation.
The bill also directs the Secretary of Labor to issue implementing regulations within 180 days of enactment, through notice-and-comment rulemaking, and to apply those regulations to plan years beginning at least six months after the regulations are issued. In addition, the bill includes a sense of Congress stating that the amendment is intended to clarify existing disclosure obligations under ERISA and the No Surprises Act rather than create a new requirement.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would affect the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), particularly the disclosure requirements for covered service providers to employer-sponsored health plans under section 408(b)(2). It would likely increase transparency around compensation arrangements involving pharmacy benefit managers, third-party administrators, brokers, and consultants, and could affect how health plans evaluate service-provider relationships and fees. The Department of Labor would be required to issue regulations to implement and clarify the amended disclosure standard.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge broad sentiment. Based on the bill text, the measure appears framed as a clarification and transparency measure, which suggests a generally pro-disclosure policy approach rather than a controversial structural overhaul. The bipartisan sponsorship by Senator Marshall and Senator Blunt Rochester also suggests an effort to present the bill as a targeted, technical fix.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is whether the bill truly only clarifies existing law or effectively expands disclosure obligations for PBMs, third-party administrators, brokers, consultants, and their affiliates or subcontractors. The sense-of-Congress language explicitly says it does not impose additional requirements, but the added statutory text and forthcoming regulations could still be viewed by affected industry participants as increasing compliance burdens. Employers and health plan fiduciaries may support the added transparency, while PBMs and related service providers may be concerned about broader reporting obligations and regulatory uncertainty.
An act to add Article 3.9 (commencing with Section 53059) to Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code, relating to health care coverage.