WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HR 9486

To amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to increase transparency of group health plan data, prevent discrimination, and for other purposes.

119th Congress Introduced by Mark Takano

HR 9486 aims to boost group health plan transparency and prohibit discriminatory practices in plan design and administration.

Introduced in House
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HR 9486

Summary of HR 9486 (Session 119)

Purpose and intent

HR 9486 seeks to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) with three overarching aims:
- Increase transparency of data related to group health plans.
- Prevent discrimination or unfair practices within group health plan administration.
- Address additional related purposes as outlined in the bill’s text (for “other purposes” as commonly included in ERISA-related reforms).

The bill is introduced in the House and referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce for review and consideration. It has at least one co-sponsor, Rep. Mark Takano.

Key provisions and changes (highlights)

Note: The following reflects the general intent typically associated with ERISA transparency and nondiscrimination enhancements. The exact statutory text would detail precise requirements, definitions, and enforcement mechanisms. The summary here highlights the core areas likely addressed by HR 9486 based on the bill’s title and purpose.

  • Data transparency requirements for group health plans

    • Mandates more comprehensive reporting and disclosure of plan data to regulators, participants, and possibly the public.
    • May specify standard data formats, timing for disclosures, and the scope of data to be reported (e.g., cost sharing, utilization, network adequacy, and benefit design information).

  • Anti-discrimination and fairness provisions

    • Prohibits discriminatory practices in plan design, enrollment, eligibility determinations, access to benefits, or premium structures.
    • Potentially introduces new safeguards to ensure equal access to coverage across demographic groups (e.g., by age, gender, race, or socioeconomic status) and to prevent plan designs that disadvantage certain groups.

  • Administrative and enforcement provisions

    • Establishes oversight mechanisms, which could include regulatory guidance, audits, or penalties for noncompliance.
    • May define who enforces the provisions (e.g., Department of Labor, Department of Health and Human Services, or a joint ERISA enforcement framework) and the remedies available to participants.

  • Definitions and scope

    • Clarifies terms such as “group health plan,” “transparency,” “discrimination,” and “data” to ensure consistent application.
    • Specifies which plans are subject to the requirements (e.g., private-sector employer-sponsored plans, and possibly excluding small associations or certain excepted benefits, depending on the bill’s language).

Who would be affected

  • Employers and plan sponsors offering group health plans under ERISA.
  • Plan administrators and third-party administrators responsible for compliance, reporting, and disclosures.
  • Plan participants and beneficiaries who would benefit from enhanced transparency (better understanding of costs, coverage, and plan design) and protections against discriminatory practices.
  • Regulators and enforcement agencies charged with monitoring compliance and imposing penalties for violations.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Status: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce (as of 2026-06-25).
  • Introduction: The bill was introduced in the House and has at least one co-sponsor (Rep. Mark Takano).
  • Next steps likely include committee hearings, potential markup, and votes in committee, followed by floor consideration and potential passage in the House. If passed, the bill would proceed to the Senate (and may require reconciliation with any Senate counterpart or additional legislative action) before any final enactment.

Practical impact and considerations

  • If enacted, the bill could increase compliance burdens on sponsors and plan administrators due to enhanced reporting requirements and nondiscrimination safeguards.
  • Greater transparency may empower participants with clearer information about costs, coverage options, and plan performance.
  • Stronger anti-discrimination provisions could affect plan design, premium structures, and eligibility practices.
  • The actual magnitude of impact depends on the final text, including data elements required, enforcement mechanisms, exemptions, and effective dates.

If you’d like, I can tailor the summary to a specific audience (e.g., policymakers, employers, or consumer advocates) or compare HR 9486 to existing ERISA transparency and nondiscrimination provisions.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.