California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB29

Introduced
12/5/16  
Introduced
12/5/16  
Refer
3/27/17  
Report Pass
3/28/17  
Refer
3/29/17  
Refer
3/29/17  
Refer
4/6/17  
Report Pass
5/3/17  
Report Pass
5/3/17  
Refer
5/8/17  
Refer
5/8/17  
Report Pass
5/10/17  
Report Pass
5/10/17  
Refer
5/15/17  
Refer
5/15/17  
Refer
5/24/17  
Refer
5/24/17  

Caption

Pharmacy benefit managers.

Impact

If passed, AB29 will enforce rigorous reporting requirements for PBMs, compelling them to provide detailed accounts of rebates and discounts at least quarterly. These disclosures will not only inform purchasers about the financial benefits PBMs enjoy but will also potentially equip consumers and healthcare providers with the information necessary to make better-informed choices regarding prescription medications. Additionally, the bill establishes a licensing system for PBMs, thereby intensifying regulatory scrutiny over these entities and holding them accountable for compliance with state law.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 29 (AB29) introduces regulations aimed at pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) within California's healthcare framework. The bill mandates PBMs to disclose various financial details concerning their income from pharmaceutical manufacturers, including rebates and discounts received, and the overall impact these financial arrangements have on drug pricing for purchasers. By fostering transparency in financial dealings that influence drug costs, AB29 seeks to enhance accountability and improve the understanding of drug pricing mechanisms in the state.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding AB29 leans towards favoring enhanced transparency within the complex pharmaceutical pricing system. Advocates argue that it will contribute significantly to consumer protection and support fair competition in the healthcare market. However, some industry representatives express concern about the administrative burden and potential conflicts in the disclosure of proprietary information. Critics also worry that while the intention is to facilitate transparency, the actual impact could lead to increased costs or reduced availability of some drugs due to heightened regulation.

Contention

Notable points of contention within discussions of AB29 revolve around the implications of mandatory disclosures and the new licensing requirements. Supporters assert that the increased transparency will lead to lowered drug costs and higher accountability from PBMs. Conversely, opponents caution that these requirements might impose undue burdens on PBMs, leading to unintended consequences such as reduced access to certain drugs or increased costs to consumers if businesses pass on any compliance costs.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB315

Pharmacy benefit management.

SD HB1135

Provide for transparency in the pricing of prescription drugs.

SD SB163

Address transparency in prescription drug pricing.

IL HB3761

INS-PBM/DUTIES & PROHIBITIONS

OK HB2817

Health care; creating the Oklahoma Rebate Pass-Through and Pharmacy Benefits Manager Meaningful Transparency Act of 2025; definitions; requirements; effective date.

OK HB2853

Health care; creating the Oklahoma Rebate Pass-Through and PBM Meaningful Transparency Act of 2023; definitions; requirements; effective date.

OK HB2853

Health care; creating the Oklahoma Rebate Pass-Through and PBM Meaningful Transparency Act of 2023; definitions; requirements; effective date.

OK SB1025

Health care; creating the Oklahoma Rebate Pass-Through and Pharmacy Benefits Manager Meaningful Transparency Act of 2025; clarifying authority to take certain actions. Effective date.