Why tariffs are already driving some healthcare premiums higher

Related video above: How patients and doctors can reduce healthcare costs
(NEXSTAR) – Despite the focus on the price of cars, iPhones and other consumer goods, the Trump administration's tariffs are starting to drive up prices in an entirely different industry – healthcare.
On Monday, Matt McGough, with nonprofit health policy organization KFF, wrote that several individual insurance companies have already notified state regulators that they will be raising premiums to offset the potential impact of tariffs on pharmaceuticals.
Trump hasn't yet targeted pharmaceuticals with tariffs, but has repeatedly brought it up, including on Monday aboard Air Force One.
'We're going to be doing pharmaceuticals very soon,' Trump said, according to Reuters. 'That's going to bring all the companies back, into America.'
In a May filing, the Independent Health Benefits Corporation (IHBC) said it was submitting a premium rate change of 38.4% for 2026, 'primarily due to increased costs due to inflation and tariffs, and changes in risk adjustment.'
An IHBC spokesperson told Axios that roughly 3% of that increase was to directly account for the impact of tariffs, specifically on drug prices.
McGough notes that there are other insurers who either haven't specifically mentioned the potential effect of tariffs or who declined to include an offsetting increase in 2026 premium rates.
'A large proportion of medical goods currently comes from international sources, including pharmaceuticals, medical devices and personal protective equipment, as well as other low-margin, high-use essentials like syringes, needles and blood pressure cuffs,' Tina Freese Decker, board chair of the American Hospital Association, wrote in a May post. 'Tariffs on these items could impact patient care by jeopardizing the availability of vital medications and essential health care devices. They also could raise costs for hospitals and heighten shortages and supply chain disruptions.'
Meantime, millions of Affordable Care Act (ACA) enrollees could see an over 75% average increase in premiums if Biden-era subsidies aren't extended by Congress before they expire at the end of the year, according to KFF estimates.
How much tariffs are weighing on the calculations of insurers will become a bit more clear on Aug. 1, Axios notes, when proposed 2026 premium rates are posted.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

CNBC

26 minutes ago

• CNBC

Some lawmakers in both parties question the legality of Trump's Iran strikes

WASHINGTON — Several members of Congress in both parties Saturday questioned the legality of President Donald Trump's move to launch military strikes on Iran. While Republican leaders and many rank-and-file members stood by Trump's decision to bomb Iran's major nuclear enrichment facilities, at least two GOP lawmakers joined Democrats across the party spectrum in suggesting it was unconstitutional for him to bomb Iran without approval from Congress. "While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional," Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, who usually aligns with Trump, said on X. "I look forward to his remarks tonight." Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., said in response to Trump's social media post announcing the strikes: "This is not Constitutional." Massie introduced a bipartisan resolution this week seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran "unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran" passed by Congress. In brief remarks from the White House on Saturday night, Trump defended the strikes but did not mention the basis of his legal authority to launch them without Congress' having given him that power. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., reacted in real time during a speech in Tulsa, Oklahoma, slamming Trump's actions as "grossly unconstitutional." "The only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress. The president does not have the right," Sanders told the crowd, which broke out in "no more war!" chants. Some Democrats called it an impeachable offense for the president to bomb Iran without approval from Congress. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said Trump's move is "absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." "The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers," she said on X. "He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations." Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., said on social media: "This is not about the merits of Iran's nuclear program. No president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress. This is an unambiguous impeachable offense." Casten called on House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to "grow a spine" and protect the war powers reserved for Congress. Johnson said Trump respects the Constitution as he sought to lay the groundwork to defend his decision to act unilaterally. "The President fully respects the Article I power of Congress, and tonight's necessary, limited, and targeted strike follows the history and tradition of similar military actions under presidents of both parties," he said in a statement. Johnson's remarks, along with support for Trump's move offered by Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., indicate that Trump may have sufficient political cover to avoid blowback from the Republican-controlled Congress. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Trump "failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East." But he stopped short of labeling the military action illegal or unconstitutional. House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., was more direct on the legal question. "The power to declare war resides solely with Congress. Donald Trump's unilateral decision to attack Iran is unauthorized and unconstitutional," said Clark, the No. 2 Democrat. "In doing so, the President has exposed our military and diplomatic personnel in the region to the risk of further escalation." Appearing Saturday night on MSNBC, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who co-authored the resolution with Massie, wondered whether the anti-war voters who support Trump would back his move. "This is the first true crack in the MAGA base," he said, noting that Trump's rise in the 2016 primaries was aided by his move to slam President George W. Bush for the Iraq war.

Boston Globe

29 minutes ago

• Boston Globe

Senators Markey and Warren decry Trump's Iran strikes as unconstitutional

'Only Congress can declare war — and the Senate must vote immediately to prevent another endless war,' Warren said. Fellow Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey agreed, calling the strike 'illegal' for having lacked congressional approval. He said in a statement that Saturday's attack may set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, but added that not only can the country 'rebuild its program,' it 'will now be highly motivated to do so.' 'A diplomatic solution remains the best way to permanently and verifiably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon,' Markey said. Chants of 'No More War' broke out at a Bernie Sanders rally in Tulsa, Okla., after the Vermont Senator read Trump's 'alarming' social media post announcing the strikes. 'The American people do not want more war, more death,' he said. Advertisement Massachusetts Peace Action, a Cambridge-based advocacy group, called for state leaders to speak out. The organization specifically called on Congressional leaders to pass the war power resolutions filed by Senator Tim Kaine and Representative Thomas Massie to prevent further US military action. 'We call on Massachusetts political leaders to speak out strongly against President Trump's lawless military adventure,' the organization wrote on Saturday night, shortly after the US attack on Iran. Brian Garvey, the organization's executive director, said an 'emergency event' was being planned outside Park Street Station at 1 p.m. Sunday, in protest of the strikes. Advertisement 'This direct attack by the United States on Iran a dramatic escalation by President Trump,' Garvey said in a phone call Saturday night. 'It's incredibly dangerous, it's unnecessary, and frankly, it's illegal.' Garvey said the founding fathers were explicit in giving Congress the power to declare war, adding that this is 'not how the government is supposed to work.' 'It is perhaps especially terrible because this is a president who ran saying he was going to seek peace,' he said. 'Back in 2016, he said the Iraq War was a big fat mistake. I fear that what he is leading us into could be even worse than that debacle and quagmire.' Garvey said he was 'fearful' for the US service members stationed in the Middle East, and 'outraged' that the strikes threatened their safety. Camilo Fonseca can be reached at

New York Post

31 minutes ago

• New York Post

Democratic mayoral race didn't even TOUCH on fixing the public schools

If there's one thing the Democratic candidates for mayor don't want to talk about, it's getting better results out of the city's public schools. Even though the Department of Education, now burning more than $40 billion a year and over $33,000 per student, is easily the biggest item in the city budget and still growing even though enrollment is declining. To be fair, one candidate did want to talk about the schools, but hedge-fund exec and philanthropist Whitney Tilson never got traction, perhaps because he alone refused to kow-tow to the United Federation of Teachers. Otherwise, 'I give the mayoral candidates a D or an F grade across the board,' said Ray Domanico, co-author of a damning Manhattan Institute report on education in the mayoral race. Of course, most of the field are die-hard progressives who'll never question the anti-excellence 'equity' agenda, nor cross the self-serving UFT. The worst of them, Zohran Mamdani, actually calls for ending mayoral control of the DOE and so guaranteeing that voters can't hold anyone accountable for failing schools. This, when just 33% of the city's fourth graders scored proficient in math last year and 28% in reading, numbers that don't get any better in the higher grades. Supposedly less-radical Andrew Cuomo did try to stand up to the teachers unions as governor, but got his hat handed to him. He's since publicly denounced his own past positions and even embraced a core priority of the mayor he once held in utter contempt, calling to ramp up Bill de Blasio's 'community schools' initiative. In all, Cuomo's education platform panders shamelessly to the UFT and its hatred of charter schools — the only part of the public-school system that offers real educational opportunity in most of the city. No one in the race dares call for a return to Bloomberg-era policies: expanding charters while opening more good regular public schools and doing top-down reorganization of failed ones. Nor will they breathe a word about chronic absenteeism, a huge post-COVID problem. More than a third, 34.8%, of Gotham students — about 300,000 public school kids —missed at least 10% of the 180-day school year in 2024, up from 26.5% in 2019. That's a disaster, but the candidates won't even talk about it Maybe the fall campaign will see candidates talking about doing better for New York's kids, but it's beyond damning that the topic is taboo in today's Democratic Party.