H.R. 267 (119th)Bill Overview

Health Care PRICE Transparency Act

Health|Civil actions and liabilityConsumer affairs
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 9, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill expands federal price-transparency requirements for hospitals and health plans. Hospitals must publish machine-readable lists of standard charges, payer-specific negotiated rates, de-identified min/max negotiated charges, discounted cash prices, billing codes, and provide online price-estimator tools covering at least 300 shoppable services.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize consumer empowerment and drug price transparency.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is well-specified in the required disclosures, formats, and definitions and integrates cleanly into existing statutory structures.

This bill expands federal price-transparency requirements for hospitals and health plans.

Hospitals must publish machine-readable lists of standard charges, payer-specific negotiated rates, de-identified min/max negotiated charges, discounted cash prices, billing codes, and provide online price-estimator tools covering at least 300 shoppable services.

The bill amends ACA transparency rules to require in-network rates, out-of-network allowed amounts, negotiated drug rates, and historical net drug prices be disclosed through internet self-service tools and paper requests.

Passage35/100

Likely to attract bipartisan interest on transparency but faces substantial industry pushback, legal complexity, and Senate hurdles.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is well-specified in the required disclosures, formats, and definitions and integrates cleanly into existing statutory structures. It provides clear mechanism-level detail but omits implementation timelines, funding provisions, and comprehensive accountability/audit mechanisms.

Contention65/100

Progressives emphasize consumer empowerment and drug price transparency.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
ConsumersConsumers

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • ConsumersConsumers receive more actionable upfront estimates of out-of-pocket costs for scheduled services.
  • Potential benefitPrice visibility could increase competitive pressure on some providers to lower prices.
  • Potential benefitGreater transparency of drug historical net prices could support payer negotiations and public oversight.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenHospitals and insurers will incur administrative and technology costs to compile and publish required data.
  • Potential burdenPublic disclosure of negotiated rates could erode negotiation leverage or lead to price signaling among payers.
  • ConsumersComplexity and volume of disclosed data may confuse consumers, limiting effective price shopping.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize consumer empowerment and drug price transparency.
Progressive90%

Generally supportive because the bill increases consumer access to pricing data and drug price transparency.

Sees potential to reduce surprise bills and improve accountability, but may worry about weak enforcement and possible hospital gaming.

Leans supportive
Centrist65%

Cautiously favorable: values consumer information but concerned about implementation, accuracy, and administrative costs.

Supports phased, well-specified standards to avoid confusion and undue burden on providers and plans.

Split reaction
Conservative30%

Skeptical: supports greater market information in principle but worries about federal overreach and damage to negotiated contracting.

Sees risks to competition and proprietary negotiation leverage and dislikes mandates on self-insured plans.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood35/100

Likely to attract bipartisan interest on transparency but faces substantial industry pushback, legal complexity, and Senate hurdles.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
86%
Complexityhigh
Why this could stall
  • Potential legal challenges over disclosure of negotiated rates
  • ERISA and preemption implications for self-insured plans
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize consumer empowerment and drug price transparency.

Likely to attract bipartisan interest on transparency but faces substantial industry pushback, legal complexity, and Senate hurdles.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is well-specified in the required disclosures, formats, and definitions and integrates cleanly into existing statutory structures.…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis