Medicare Enrolled will see Lower Costs on Select Drugs in 2026

Published in Blackstone Valley Call & Times on December 2, 2025

With Medicare Open Enrollment ending next week, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has announced that last year’s Medicare negotiations produced a net savings of 44%—about $12 billion—on 15 widely used prescription drugs that treat cancer and other serious chronic conditions.

The new Maximum Fair Prices (MFPs) for these 15 drugs will take effect on January 1, 2027. Combined with the 10 drugs already negotiated—whose MFPs take effect January 1, 2026—a total of 25 drugs will have negotiated lower prices. These medications, used to treat conditions such as cancer, diabetes, asthma, and cardiovascular and neurological disorders, represent some of the highest Medicare Part D spending.

The Beginning of Drug Price Negotiations

Three years ago, after President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in August 2022, CMS began developing the process for Medicare’s first-ever drug price negotiations. On March 15, 2023, the federal agency issued its initial program guidance and received more than 7,500 public comments from consumer groups, patient advocates, drug manufacturers, and pharmacies. Revised guidance followed on June 30, 2023.

On August 29, 2023, CMS released the first list of 10 high-cost drugs selected for negotiation—marking the first time in Medicare’s history that it could negotiate directly with pharmaceutical companies.

Pharmaceutical industry groups and several companies attempted to block the law in court. In response, 70 organizations and 150,000 petition signers urged Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Astellas Pharma US, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to drop their lawsuits. Multiple organizations also filed amicus briefs supporting the law.

Three years in process, and with courts ultimately allowing the program to proceed, that first round of 10 drugs with negotiated prices will take effect in 2026.

CMS Drug Negotiations Added 15 Drugs

On January 17th, CMS announced it had selected 15 additional drugs for the second cycle of negotiations under Medicare Part D and on November 25th, it was announced that agreements had been reached on all of them. These medications are among the most costly and most commonly used by Medicare beneficiaries, treating conditions such as cancer, diabetes, and asthma. The new round of negotiations is expected to save Medicare billions and strengthen the program’s long-term sustainability.

“This year’s results stand in stark contrast to last year’s,” said CMS Administrator Mehmet OzMD, in announcing the second cycle of negotiations.  “Using the same process with a bolder direction, we have achieved substantially better outcomes for taxpayers and seniors in the Medicare Part D program — not the modest or even counterproductive ‘deals’ we saw before.”

“Whether through the Inflation Reduction Act or President Trump’s Most Favored Nation policy, this is what serious, fair, and disciplined negotiation looks like,” adds CMS Deputy Administrator and Medicare Director Chris Klomp. “I’m deeply proud of our team, who execute exceptionally well to bring affordability to the country in everything we do.”

Between January 1 and December 31, 2024, approximately 5.3 million Medicare Part D enrollees used one or more of these 15 drugs. Total gross Part D spending for them was $42.5 billion, representing about 15% of all Part D drug costs.

Anthony Wright, executive director of Families USA, praised the newly released negotiated prices, stating that they show what is possible when “policymakers put patients before corporate profits.” Wright emphasized that these reductions build on the work of establishing the Drug Price Negotiation Program, which aims to provide financial relief to older adults and people with disabilities.

Wright noted that the first and second rounds of negotiated drugs together account for about one-third of Medicare Part D spending, with price reductions ranging from 38% to 85%. In 2027, beneficiaries using these drugs are projected to save $685 million in out-of-pocket costs. He added that the savings support both individual beneficiaries and the long-term sustainability of the Medicare program.

Despite pharmaceutical companies’ continued attempts to limit the program—through lawsuits and legislative provisions such as those in H.R. 1—Wright said the negotiation program remains “the most effective tool currently available to lower drug prices.”

“The Medicare Negotiation Program changed the trajectory of drug pricing in the United States, helping to reduce Big Pharma’s monopoly pricing power, which dictated prices to Americans on Medicare for two decades,” said Merith Basey, executive director of Patients for Affordable Drugs in a statement. “This second round of negotiations — now under President Trump — marks another major milestone, delivering continued savings for patients and taxpayers,” he said.

“The lower negotiated prices are more than numbers on a page. For patients who’ve been forced to work multiple jobs, cut pills in half, or choose between filling a prescription and buying groceries, these lower prices will bring long-overdue relief, flexibility, and stability,” added Basey.

“The requirement that Medicare negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs continues to pay dividends for older Americans and taxpayers,” adds Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans. “The announcement of lower drug prices for 15 high-priced drugs is a win for more than 5 million seniors who take these drugs to treat asthma, diabetes, lung disease and other serious conditions, and will soon pay less for their medications,” he says.

“The 4.4 million members of the Alliance are pleased that the Trump Administration has followed the law, negotiated these prices, and defended this law in court,” Fiesta says, calling on Congress to increase the number of drugs subject to price negotiations.

While the White House along with aging groups praise the impact of IRA’s Medicare drug negotiation provisions, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) issued a statement calling it “flawed.”

“Whether it is the IRA or MFN, government price setting for medicines is the wrong policy for America. Price setting does nothing to rein in PBMs who decide which medicines are covered and what patients pay. In fact, many patients are facing additional coverage barriers and paying more out-of-pocket for medicines because of the IRA, warns Alex Schriver, Senior Vice President of Public Affairs.

“These flawed policies also threaten future medical innovation by siphoning $300 billion from biopharmaceutical research, undermining the American economy and our ability to compete globally,” states Schriver, noting that PhRMA members are stepping up to make medicines more affordable by enabling direct purchase at lower prices and investing in U.S. manufacturing and infrastructure.

Lower Drug Cost Legislation Introduced

Congressman John B. Larson (D-CT), a senior member of the House Ways and Means Committee, praised the latest CMS announcement, estimating that both negotiation rounds will save older Americans more than $2 billion per year in out-of-pocket costs. Larson noted that families and seniors continue to struggle with rising prices, especially for prescription drugs.  The lawmaker pushed to enable Medicare to negotiate drug prices to lower drug costs by the enactment of IRA.

Last week, House Democrats introduced the Lower Drug Costs for American Families Act, aimed at closing loopholes in H.R. 1 and further reducing prescription drug prices. The bill (H.R. 6166), introduced November 20 by Ranking Members Frank Pallone Jr. (Energy and Commerce), Richard Neal (Ways and Means), and Bobby Scott (Education and Workforce), has been referred to all three committees.

Key provisions of the bill would:

  • Extend Medicare’s price negotiation authority to all Americans with private insurance—covering more than 164 million people with employer-sponsored plans and over 24 million enrolled in Affordable Care Act plans
  • Apply inflation-based rebate protections to private insurance markets, potentially saving $40 billion over 10 years
  • Increase the number of negotiated drugs from 20 to 50 per year
  • Extend the $2,000 annual out-of-pocket prescription drug cap to privately insured patients
  • Cap insulin costs at $35 per month for those with private insurance
  • Close the orphan-drug loophole that allows companies to avoid negotiation
  • Require consideration of international drug prices to ensure Americans do not pay three to five times more than patients in other countries

Continue the Momentum

According to CMS, the agency will announce the specifics on 15 drugs for the third round of Medicare price negotiations by February 1, 2026. This new round will include drugs paid under Medicare Part B for the first time and will begin with negotiated prices effective January 1, 2028. CMS has already released final guidance for the program and will also use this process to select drugs for renegotiation in previous cycles. IRA also establishes an ongoing process where more drugs will be selected for negotiation in subsequent years.

A Dec. 2024 AARP survey found that almost 3 in 5 adults age 50 and older expressed concern about their ability to afford prescriptions over the near future.  Respondents included both Medicare beneficiaries and younger persons. About 96 percent of the respondents call on the government to do more to lower pharmaceutical prices.

AARP noted that this survey was taken right before a new $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket drug expenses took effect in 2025.

With the announcement of lower drug costs that result from Medicare’s round 2 drug negotiations, there is an  opportunity to build on this momentum for real change. Lawmakers can legislate to put the public’s health above profit by giving consumers more power to negotiate, making competition stronger, and keeping patients from having to pay too much out of pocket.

It is now time for Congress to act.

It’s now time for Congress to give tax credits to America’s caregivers

Published in RINewsToday on February 24, 2025

Just a few days after the 119th Congress was sworn in on Friday, January 3rd, AARP, along with 94 organizations, sent a letter to Congress urging lawmakers to enact legislation to provide financial relief for America’s caregivers. This could be accomplished by including the bipartisan bicameral Credit for Caring Act of 2024 (S. 3702/H.R. 7165 introduced in the 118th Congress) in any tax legislation that is advanced during the new Congress, says the joint letter.    

S. 3702/H.R. 7165, introduced during the last session of Congress by Sen. Michael Bennett (D-Colorado) and House lawmakers Mike Carey (D-Ohio), would allow an eligible caregiver a tax credit of up to $5,000 for 30% of the cost of long-term care expenses that exceed $2,000 in a taxable year. The bills defined eligible caregiver as an individual who has earned income for the taxable year in excess of $7,500 and pays or incurs expenses for providing care to a spouse or other dependent relative with long-term care needs. 

The joint letter, dated Jan. 7, 2025, stressed that family caregivers make it possible for older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans, to live independently in their community and age in place at home.  It also cited an AARP study that found caregivers provided $600 billion annually in unpaid labor in 2021 to care for their loved ones. (This figure is based on about 38 million caregivers providing an average of 18 hours of care per week for a total of 36 billion hours of care, at an average value of $16.59 per hour). 

Caregivers take a hefty financial hit, too, having to cover out-of-pocket expenses associated with caregiving and losing income by cutting back on work hours or leaving the workforce entirely. When this occurs these individuals would see reduced Social Security and retirement savings by receiving reduced Social Security and other retirement benefits, noted the organizations in the correspondence. 

The joint letter also mentioned an AARP study that reported family caregivers spend on average, 26 percent of their income on caregiving expenses or over $7,200 annually. The uncompensated care saves taxes payers billions of dollars by delaying or even preventing admission to costly nursing home care and unnecessary hospital stays.  

The joint letter suggested that any tax legislation consider include a new, non-refundable tax credit of up to $ 5,000 for eligible working family caregivers would reduce the significant financial impact of caregiving.  Eligible caregivers caring for loved ones of all ages could receive the credit if the care recipient meets certain functional or cognitive limitations or other requires.  This tax credit would help working family caregivers regardless of whether they live with their loved one or if their loved one is a dependent. 

Overwhelmingly support for tax relief for caregivers 

A newly released AARP poll findings indicate that voters in competitive congressional districts want Congress to give financial relief to America’s family caregivers. The poll, conducted in late Jan. 2025, highlights a “clear, bipartisan mandate” say prominent pollsters from Fabrizio Ward and Impact Research. 

The bipartisan polling team conducted this survey of 3,000 registered voters nationally and 1,000 voters in the 28 most competitive House districts between January 27 and February 1, 2025. According to AARP, the districts chosen were the 15 Republican-held districts won by <5% of the vote in 2024, and the 13 Democratic-held districts that were also won by President Trump in 2024. The margin of sampling error for the national survey is ±1.8% and ±3.1% for the congressional districts survey.

The AARP poll findings reveal overwhelming voter support (84%) for Congress and the Trump Administration to act this Congress on a caregiver tax credit. Among various tax proposals currently being considered by Congress — including eliminating income taxes on Social Security, tips, and overtime pay—voters ranked passing a caregiver tax credit as their top priority. 

“America’s family caregivers put family first, helping their parents, spouses and others stay at home. They spend thousands of dollars every year on this care, while juggling work and family responsibilities,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP Executive Vice President and Chief Advocacy & Engagement Officer in a statement released on Feb. 11, 2025 announcing the results of AARP’s poll. “Without them, millions of older Americans would be forced into costly nursing homes—many at taxpayer expense. As Congress debates tax policy, the message from voters is clear: lawmakers must prioritize financial relief for hardworking Americans who are caring for their aging family members. AARP urges Congress to put money back into the pockets of hardworking family caregivers by passing a tax credit,” she says.  

Bipartisan

The poll findings indicate that support for the caregiving tax credit spans party lines, with strong majorities of Republicans (84%), Independents (82%), and Democrats (87%) in favor.  And support for a caregiver tax credit (84%) outpaces support for continuing the 2017 tax cuts (51%).  

Seventy-six-percent of voters agree that “Before Congress extends any tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations, it should support working Americans with a tax credit to help cover the expenses of taking care of a loved one.”  

Family caregiving crosses party lines, with nearly two-thirds of voters (63%) serving as family caregivers at some point in their lives—many of whom struggle financially. 

Most voters (63%) say they are worried about their personal financial situation.  Family caregivers nationwide, many of whom face financial struggles, spend an average of $7,200 in out-of-pocket expenses each year—making it harder to afford essentials like groceries and bills.

“Voters over the age of 50 are a critical voting bloc that all candidates should compete for every election cycle,” adds Tony Fabrizio, partner at Fabrizio Ward“Our poll found that Americans of all political stripes want leaders to support family caregivers. Candidates looking ahead to the 2026 midterms should pay attention to this issue if they want to win,” he said.

Could tax credits for caregivers become a reality?

Maybe.  During the 118th Congress, Republican and Democratic lawmakers came together to cosponsor legislation that called for federal tax credits for caregivers. S. 3702, with 11 Democrats, 3 Republicans and 3 Independents, was referred to the Senate Finance Committee.  Its companion measure in the lower chamber, H. R. 7165, with 81 cosponsors (72 Democrats and 9 Republicans), was referred to House Ways and Means Committee.  Both bipartisan bills never made it to mark up or even to the House floor for vote. 

Tax Notes reporter Alexander Rifaat, who covers the White House and Treasury, reported in a web article posted on Oct. 29, 2024 that Presidential Republican candidate Donald Trump supported tax relief for caregivers. Rifaat noted that during his 2024 presidential election, at a campaign event held at New York’s Madison Square Garden on Oct. 27, Trump called for a national tax credit for caregivers who are “never spoken of” and stay at home. 

At the campaign event,  Rifaat noted that Trump told the crowd:  “I will support a tax credit for family caregivers who take care of a parent or a loved one. And it’s about time they were recognized, right?” 

Now, as President Trump has an opportunity to keep this campaign promise by calling on the Republican-controlled Congress to work with Democratic lawmakers to give America’s caregivers financial relief, through the passage of a national tax credit legislation that will benefit them.  It’s time to work together and put caregivers before partisan politics.

For a copy of the National Legislative Priorities Survey, Feb. 2025, go to www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/topics/voter-opinion-research/politics/federal-tax-package-legislative-priorities.doi.10.26419-2fres.00921.001.pdf.

For a listing of organizations urging Congress in Jan. 7, 2025 correspondence to provide financial tax relief to caregivers, go to www.nase.org/sf-docs/default-source/advocacy-documents/financial-relief-for-family-caregivers-credit-for-caring-act-sign-on-letter-january-2025-(1).pdf?sfvrsn=e6b0e0f0_1

www.bls.gov/blog/2023/celebrating-national-family-caregivers-month-with-bls-data.html

To read AARP’s Research Insights into Caregiving, go to www.aarp.org/pri/topics/ltss/family-caregiving/aarp-research-insights-caregiving/.

New study gives Congress a road map to fix Social Security 

Published in RINewsToday on February 17, 2025

As Social Security celebrates its 90th anniversary on Aug. 14, 2025, this essential retirement program has long been facing a significant long-term financing gap.  According to the 2024 Social Security trustees report, unless Congress acts the trust funds will be depleted by 2035, forcing the program to reduce benefits by 17%.

With over 70 million retirees and individuals with disabilities receiving Social Security benefits, it is time for Congress to get serious about hammering out a viable bipartisan solution to resolving Social Security’s funding gap.  And a recently released report provides the groundwork for a policy that a partisan Congress might just consider.   

Last month, the National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI), AARP, the National Institute on Retirement Security (NIRS), and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (USCC) released the results of a qualitative analysis study, on Jan. 29, 2025, detailing American views on Social Security, a federal “social safety net” program that provides income to people who are retired, disabled, or have dependents, helping them to plan for retirement and other life events.   

The new, recently released, 72-page report, entitled, Social Security at 90: A Bipartisan Roadmap for the Program’s Future, is a must read for the White House and Congressional lawmakers as they begin to debate specific policies that would make long-term fixes to ensure the long-term solvency of the America’s retirement program.  

The NASI survey, fielded by NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonprofit research organization, surveyed 2,243 Americans ages 21 and over. 

Unlike most public opinion research on Social Security, which asks about each policy option individually, NASI says that this survey, conducted in partnership with the Washington, DC-based Greenwald Research, a firm having extensive experience in public opinion and consumer preference research, features a unique trade-off analysis that examine which combination of product features – or in this case policy changes- that consumers prefer and are willing to pay for.

The study’s findings are also largely consistent with previous NASI 2012 and 2014 studies, Strengthening Social Security: What Do American’s Want? and Americans Make Hard Choices: A Survey with Trade-off Analysis

Sending a clear message to Washington

The NASI study’s findings indicate that Americans (across party lines, generations, income and education), strongly support Social Security and see it as the lynchpin for retirement security.  Only four percent state that they do not consider it to be an important income to draw on during retirement. 

Rather than ensuring the solvency of Social Security through cutting benefits, the survey respondents strongly support strengthening the program’s finances by raising revenues, noting the study’s findings.  Eighty-five percent of the respondents call for benefits not being reduced, even if this means raising taxes on some or all Americans.

According to the survey’s findings, the most strongly favored option is eliminating the cap on payroll tax contributions for those earning more than $400,000 per year and their employers, who would contribute to Social Security via payroll taxes on wages above that amount. Those affected would not receive additional benefits.

Additionally, respondents across all groups, including a majority of Republicans, say they are willing to pay more themselves by gradually increasing the payroll tax rate from 6.2 percent to 7.2 percent, to strengthen the program’s finances.  Workers earning less than $50,000 per year would not take financial hits. They would only contribute an additional $42 per month.

Don’t touch our benefits!

Given a broad set of policy options available to address Social Security’s financing gap, the respondents also reject benefit reductions such as keeping the full retirement age at 67 instead of further raising. Those surveyed also called for adjusting the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) to more accurately reflect inflation and spending habits of older adults.

The NASI study also found that Americans want to strengthen Social Security benefits by adding a caregiver credit for workers who take time out of the workforce to care for young children and a “bridge benefit” to protect from the early claiming reduction of those in physically demanding jobs who may be unable to continue working up to full retirement age.

Finally, the study’s findings indicate that overwhelming majority of Americans (90 percent) see the need and valuable of Social Security’s disability benefits, too.  These respondents say that they will need Social Security’s disability benefits if they become disabled and unable to support themselves through work, and only four percent support cutting disability benefits. The survey also finds strong bipartisan support for updating outdated rules in Supplemental Security Income, including its $2,000 asset limit.

Statements from NASI and core partners

“At a time when our country is deeply divided, Social Security remains a powerful unifying force,” said Rebecca Vallas, NASI’s Chief Executive Officer. “This survey shows there is strong bipartisan agreement on how the American people want to secure the program’s future, and we urge policymakers to listen,” she says.

“It is rare in today’s political climate to see people unite around anything,” adds AARP Chief Public Policy Officer Deb Whitman, noting that all Americans want their Social Security benefits to be preserved. They are willing to do what it takes to ensure the program continues to provide meaningful support for future generations, she says.

“Social Security is the foundation of retirement security in the United States. This report clearly indicates both the important role that Social Security plays as a source of retirement income for older Americans as well as the priority the American people place on resolving the financing gap so that benefits are not cut indiscriminately,” said Tyler Bond, NIRS’s Research Director. “This research continues a long history of finding strong support for Social Security among the public,” he says.

Finally, stated: “These survey results show that Americans value Social Security and their private sector retirement benefits because they were unwilling to cut those benefits to finance Social Security,” says Chantel Sheaks, USCC’s Vice President of Retirement Policy. “Americans think of these together, and policymakers should as well,” he suggests.

Adding their two cents

“This survey shows that Americans — Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike — absolutely do not want to see cuts to Social Security’s modest benefits,” says Nancy Altman, President of the Washington, DC-based Social Security Works.

“Instead, they want the wealthy to finally start contributing their fair share. If necessary, they are even willing to pay more themselves. Any DC politician who supports benefit cuts is wildly out of step with the American people,” she notes.

“While the study’s findings are consistent with other major surveys on Social Security during the previous years, it is remarkable that despite the current tumultuous political environment, American voters have a deep emotional bond with the program and want to ensure that Congress protects and improves their benefits without cutting them,” says Dan Adcock, director of government relations and policy at the Washington, DC-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

The NASI poll sends a strong signal to members of Congress that they should support legislation, like Rep. John Larson (D-CT) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s Social Security 2100 Act, that would extend solvency and improve benefits by having the wealthy pay their fair share of payroll taxes,” says Adcock. 

In one of President Trump’s rolling press conferences, he touched upon Social Security saying there were no cuts being proposed – if anything he would make the program stronger.

Social Security and the Ocean State 

In 2022, there were more than 233,000 Social Security beneficiaries in Rhode Island, including more than 172,000 retirees, 32,000 disabled workers, and almost 14,000 children,” says NIRS’s Tyler Bond, noting that all of these Rhode Islanders face the prospect of an indiscriminate benefit cut in a decade unless Congress acts to shore up Social Security’s financing. 

“This report has one clear takeaway: the American people do not want Social Security benefit cuts, and they are willing to pay more themselves to avoid those potential benefit cuts,” adds Bond.

In conclusion, the NASI report cites 84-year-old Elizabeth R. Virginia, about her personal views on America’s retirement program. “Social Security is one of the most dependable things that we have. You know that it will come again at the same time. Right now, I know the second day of every month, it is there,” she says.

As Virginia knows, she can count on receiving her monthly Social Security check.  The program has never missed a payment in nine decades.  Congress must now work together to ensure that this never will happen.

For a copy of NASI’s Social Security report, go to www.nasi.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/NASI_SocialSecurityat90.pdf

For copy of NASI’s issue brief, “America’s View on Social Security,” go to www.nirsonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/FINAL-Views-on-SS-July-2024.pdf/

For statistics on RI Social Security beneficiaries, go to Source for RI statistics, go to www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/oasdi_zip/2022/ri.pdf.