Category: PBMs and Payers

Oregon legislators have introduced a bill that would prohibit discriminatory practices by pharmacy benefit managers and insurance plans against 340B pharmacies, including reimbursing a 340B pharmacy less for prescription drugs compared with non-340B pharmacies. 

If passed later this year, House

West Virginia has reinforced its groundbreaking 2019 law forbidding what providers say is pharmacy benefit manager discrimination against 340B covered entities.

An amendment passed in March that took effect June 10 clarifies that PBMs or other third-party payers may not require a

Arizona lawmakers passed legislation last week prohibiting various forms of pharmacy benefit manager discrimination against 340B covered entities.

Gov. Doug Ducey (R) has not signaled if he will sign SB 1176, veto it, or let it become law without his

The Colorado General Assembly has voted to stop health insurers, pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), and other third-party payers from discriminating against 340B covered entities and their contract pharmacies.

Gov. Jared Polis (D) is expected to sign the bill, HB22-1122. He

The Illinois legislature has voted to forbid pharmacy benefit managers, third party payers, and Medicaid managed care organizations from discriminating against 340B covered entities and their contract pharmacies.

At least three other states have passed similar legislation so far in

Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts (R) signed legislation last week to protect 340B covered entities and their contract pharmacies from discrimination by pharmacy benefit managers.

Legislative Bill 767 makes Nebraska the third known state to take such action this year.