Michigan Senate chamber
A bill that would enact contract pharmacy protections in Michigan has garnered renewed attention from 340B supporters and critics, alike, in the final days before the state’s legislature is set to recess for the summer.

Michigan Senate Rejects Attempt to Weaken Recent 340B Anti-Discrimination Law

The Michigan Senate has defeated legislation that hospitals say would have removed language from a nearly year-old state law that stops payers, pharmacy benefit managers, or other third parties from requiring 340B claims modifiers except as required to prevent Medicaid duplicate discounts.

Michigan hospitals believe the law signed in February 2022 bars drug companies from withholding 340B pricing if a covered entity refuses to hand over its contract pharmacy claims data. Manufacturers this spring reportedly asked state legislators to erase that language from the law.

State senators on Nov. 29 defeated the proposed amendment to the new state law.

“Our association recognizes the key role the 340B drug pricing program plays for our members that qualify as covered entities and use the savings to maintain access to comprehensive health services as they face skyrocketing increases to drug prices and the impacts of inflation on staffing, supplies, and equipment,” Michigan Health & Hospital Association CEO Brian Peters said in a statement about the amendment’s defeat.

“Earlier this year Michigan passed legislation that offers some of the best state-level 340B protections in our country. The MHA will continue to educate lawmakers on the value of those savings and how any attempts to erode those protections undermines the central purpose of the program, which is to allow covered entities to reach more eligible patients and expand access to care.” 

Editor at Large | Website | + posts
« Read Previous Read Next »
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
×
×

*Sign up for news summaries and alerts from 340B Report

Site Footer Live