To prohibit pharmacy benefit managers and pharmacies from being under common ownership, and for other purposes.

Summary of HR 8779 (119th Congress)

Purpose and intent

HR 8779 aims to prohibit pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and pharmacies from being under common ownership. The bill seeks to address potential conflicts of interest, reduce vertical integration between PBMs and pharmacies, and promote competition within the prescription drug supply chain. By restricting ownership ties, the measure intends to enhance transparency and potentially lower drug costs or improve access for consumers.

Key provisions and changes

• Prohibition on common ownership: The bill would ban any entity from owning both a PBM and a chain/pharmacy or independent pharmacies. This restriction targets vertical integration where the same corporate entity controls both a PBM and a pharmacy network.
• Scope of entities: The prohibition would apply to entities that operate as a PBM and entities that own or operate pharmacies, including retail and possibly mail-order models, depending on the final text.
• Compliance framework: The bill would establish rules to enforce the prohibition, including definitions of “pharmacy benefit manager” and “pharmacy,” and mechanisms to ensure that ownership structures do not violate the ban.
• Oversight and enforcement: Potential provisions for regulatory oversight, penalties for violations, and processes for reporting or challenging non-compliant arrangements.
• Transition considerations: If applicable, there could be a phase-in period or safe harbors to allow affected entities to adjust ownership structures without incurring penalties, though specifics would be in the statutory text.

Who would be affected

• Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs): Directly restricted from maintaining common ownership with pharmacies.
• Pharmacies: Including retail and possibly other pharmacy entities that operate in the same ownership group as a PBM would be limited from being under common ownership.
• Parent and affiliated entities: Corporate groups that currently own both PBMs and pharmacies would need to divest or restructure to comply.
• Consumers and providers: Indirectly affected through potential changes in negotiating dynamics, pricing, rebates, and access to pharmacy networks.

Procedural and timeline aspects

• Introduction and referral: HR 8779 was introduced in the House and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary on May 13, 2026.
• Legislative process status: As of the last action, it has not advanced beyond referral to committee. Subsequent steps would typically include committee consideration, potential markups, floor votes in the House, potential Senate action, and the President’s signature.
• Sponsorship: The bill has multiple co-sponsors, indicating bipartisan interest. Notable co-sponsors include Greg Landsman, Buddy Carter, Jake Auchincloss, Diana Harshbarger, Jerry Nadler, and Troy Nehls.

Additional notes

• The description above reflects the bill’s stated objective to separate ownership between PBMs and pharmacies to prevent conflicts of interest and enhance competition.
• Specific definitions, exact penalties, and any exemptions would appear in the text of the bill and accompanying committee reports. For a complete understanding, reviewing the full bill language and any manager’s amendment or fiscal impact statements would be advised.