What This Bill Does
This bill would require claim denial rates to be displayed under federal health coverage laws, including the Public Health Service Act, ERISA, and the Internal Revenue Code. The practical effect is to make health plans and insurers show consumers how often claims are denied in a more visible and comparable way. It would most directly affect people with private health insurance, employer-sponsored coverage, and the insurers and plan administrators that run those plans.
- Requires claim denial rates to be displayed under the Public Health Service Act
- Amends ERISA to add disclosure rules for health plan claim denials
- Changes the Internal Revenue Code to align tax-linked coverage rules
- Targets health plans, insurers, and plan administrators that process claims
Who This Bill Affects
If you get health coverage through an employer or buy private insurance, this bill could make it easier to see how often your plan denies claims before you enroll or renew. That would not change your premiums or benefits directly, but it could influence which plan you choose and give you a clearer picture of the likelihood of claim disputes. Insurers and plan administrators would face new disclosure duties tied to displaying denial rates.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisOfficial Source & Bill Facts
BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.
- Bill
- HR 9396
- Congress
- 119th Congress
- Official title
- To amend title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the displaying of claim denial rates.
- Policy area
- Healthcare
- Latest action
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. (June 23, 2026)
- Last updated
- June 24, 2026
Who Supports & Opposes This
- Health insurance consumers People want a clearer picture of how a plan handles claims, not just its monthly premium. Published denial rates can help families compare coverage quality and avoid plans that reject claims too often.
- Employers that sponsor health benefits Better transparency can help employers choose plans that are more predictable for workers and less likely to generate surprise denials and complaints. That can reduce dissatisfaction and administrative churn.
- Patient advocates Claim denial data can expose patterns that are otherwise hard to see and can pressure plans to tighten internal review practices. Advocates see disclosure as a first step toward more accountable coverage decisions.
- Health insurers Denial rates can be misleading without context, since different plans cover different populations and some denials reflect valid benefit design or medical-necessity rules. Insurers may argue the display requirement could confuse consumers and create reputational pressure based on incomplete comparisons.
- Employer plan administrators Standardizing, verifying, and publishing denial data could add reporting and compliance burdens, especially for employers that self-insure. They may worry that extra disclosure requirements will increase administrative costs without improving care delivery.
- Brokers and benefits consultants If the data are not presented in a carefully standardized way, shoppers could overreact to raw denial figures instead of looking at the full package of network access, premiums, and out-of-pocket costs. That could make plan selection more complicated rather than simpler.
Key Implications
-
““require the displaying of claim denial rates””
This would force plans to make denial-rate information visible to consumers and employers, likely in a standardized format. The real-world effect is greater transparency about how often claims are rejected.
-
““amend title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act””
This ties the disclosure rule to federal health coverage requirements that apply to private insurance markets. It means the bill would reach major commercial health plans regulated through federal health law.
-
““the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974””
ERISA governs many job-based health plans, including self-insured employer coverage. Adding denial-rate disclosure here would affect a large share of workers with employer-sponsored insurance.
-
““the Internal Revenue Code of 1986””
Including the tax code suggests coordination with tax-favored health coverage rules. That helps make the disclosure requirement fit into the broader federal framework that shapes employer and individual coverage.
Latest Status
June 23, 2026
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.