Pharmacy Benefits Managers – Definition of Purchaser and Alteration of Application of Law
HB 321 amends Maryland law to change the definition of "purchaser" for pharmacy benefits manager (PBM) regulations, specifically excluding certain nonprofit health maintenance organizations (HMOs) from this definition. This removes restrictions that previously limited how certain insurance laws applied to PBMs working on behalf of carriers. The bill directly affects nonprofit HMOs that operate internal pharmacies and PBMs managing prescription drug coverage for them. These changes clarify regulatory scope without altering core PBM oversight requirements.
Bill status
passed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2025
Committee Review
Feb 2025
House of Delegates Passage
Feb 2025
Senate Passage
Governor
Introduced Jan 10, 2025
Last action Mar 19, 2025
Maddy AI version diff · 1 comparison
What changed between versions
First - Pharmacy Benefits Managers – Definition of Purchaser and Alteration of Application of Law
→
Third - Pharmacy Benefits Managers – Definition of Purchaser and Alteration of Application of Law
·
3 edits
MINOR
The bill was amended to expand its scope by adding a requirement for the Maryland Insurance Administration to convene a workgroup to review pharmacy benefits manager regulations, specialty pharmacies, and antisteering issues. The sponsor list was updated to include additional delegates, and the bill's committee status was marked as favorably amended and adopted by the House.
Scope change
The bill's scope was expanded to include a mandate for creating a workgroup to study pharmacy benefits manager regulations, specialty pharmacies, and antisteering practices.
REQUIREMENT
Added a requirement for the Maryland Insurance Administration to convene a workgroup to review and make recommendations on pharmacy benefits manager regulations, specialty pharmacies, and antisteering.
TECHNICAL
Updated the bill's sponsor list to include additional delegates (Alston, Bagnall, Bhandari, Chisholm, Cullison, Guzzone, Hill, Hutchinson, S. Johnson, Kaiser, Kerr, Lopez, Martinez, M. Morgan, Pena-Melnyk, Reilly, Szeliga, White Holland, Woods, and Woorman) and changed the committee report status to favorable with amendments.
Changed the bill reference from SB 626/24 to SB 303 in the header information.
Floor votes · House of Delegates Feb 13, 2025
How they voted
135–0
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 137
Feb 13, 2025
D
Democratic98
97% Yea
R
Republican39
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
10
Key actions
3
Committee
4
Feb 14, 2025
Committee
Referred Finance
upper
Feb 13, 2025
Lower · Passed
Third Reading Passed
lower
Feb 11, 2025
Lower · Passed
Favorable with Amendments {
lower
Feb 10, 2025
Lower · Passed
Favorable with Amendments Report by Health and Government Operations
lower
Jan 10, 2025
Committee
First Reading Health and Government Operations
lower
20 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Anne Kaiser
DDemocratic
P
Bonnie Cullison
DDemocratic
P
Brian Chisholm
RRepublican
P
Harry Bhandari
DDemocratic
P
Heather Bagnall Tudball
DDemocratic
P
Jamila Woods
DDemocratic
P
Jennifer White Holland
DDemocratic
P
JP
Joseline Peña-Melnyk
DDemocratic
P
Kathy Szeliga
RRepublican
P
Ken Kerr
DDemocratic
P
Lesley Lopez
DDemocratic
P
Matt Morgan
RRepublican
P
Nic Kipke
RRepublican
P
Pam Guzzone
DDemocratic
P
Steve Johnson
DDemocratic
P
Teresa Reilly
RRepublican
P
Teresa Woorman
DDemocratic
P
Terri Hill
DDemocratic
P
Tiffany Alston
DDemocratic
P
Tom Hutchinson
RRepublican
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about HB 321
Scope: MD
Hi! I can help you understand HB 321. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline