Health centers ask Senate to close Act 55 reporting loophole for in‑house pharmacies

Mary Kate Mullen, director of Vermont public policy at the Bi‑State Primary Care Association, told the Senate Health & Welfare Committee that H.611 should be amended to close a reporting loophole created by prior language in Act 55.

Mullen explained the 340B program at length: manufacturers participating in Medicare and Medicaid must offer reduced drug prices to certain covered entities (federally qualified health centers, Ryan White clinics, safety‑net hospitals), which creates savings that those entities then reinvest in patient services such as free care, dental, mental‑health, substance‑use treatment, translation services, and transportation. She said Act 55 had protected contract pharmacies from burdensome manufacturer reporting but did not extend the same exemption or protections to in‑house pharmacies; manufacturers are now requiring in‑house pharmacies to comply with owner reporting obligations.

Bi‑State asked the committee to insert language into the Act 55 section of H.611 adding in‑house pharmacies to the definition of covered entities so they are subject to the same reporting exemptions as contract pharmacies. Mullen said some members are not opposing the broader repeal in the bill but want this specific fix to close a loophole and preserve 340B benefits for safety‑net providers.

Committee members asked for a concrete example of a contract pharmacy (Walgreens, CVS were mentioned) and raised concerns about administrative burdens; staff observed the reporting workload could require roughly one to two full‑time equivalents in some organizations to handle compliance. Members asked Jen (staff) to provide the formal reports and for manufacturers' perspective; the committee said it will receive further testimony and a deeper review of the relevant language in follow‑up sessions.