Medicare Part D plans bid 2026 at a national average monthly bid amount of $239.27, implying a 35% per-enrollee cost increase against CBO's projected 5%. If those bid levels hold, federal Part D spending over the next decade runs roughly $500 billion above prior projections.

The February 2026 baseline booked $0.6 trillion of additional Part D outlays for 2025 to 2035. CBO also published a formal call for outside research, which is the more telling document.

Key Takeaways

  • The 2026 NAMBA is $239.27, up 33% from $179.45, against a CBO projection of roughly 5% per-enrollee growth, following misses of 20% in 2024 and 42% in 2025.
  • Plan sponsor liability in the catastrophic phase went from 15% to 60% on brand drugs while beneficiary cost sharing went to zero above the $2,000 cap.
  • CMS reinsurance payments fell from 46% of total Part D spending in 2024 to 17% in 2025, which is the transfer in one figure.
  • Catastrophic phase utilization is running about 22% above the Milliman and Wakely base cases, concentrated in GLP-1 adherence, oncology regimen completion and autoimmune biologic continuation.
  • Standalone PDPs are down 55% since the IRA to 360 for 2026, and five companies now account for 94% of them, which is the competitive discipline CBO says may be missing from the bids.

The Bids Are Not Drifting, They Are Stepping

The national average monthly bid amount is the enrollment-weighted average of plan bids for basic benefits, and it is what CMS uses to set the direct subsidy per member.

It was $64.28 in 2024. It reached $179.45 in 2025, up $115.17 or 179%. For 2026 it is $239.27, up another $59.82 or 33%. CBO expected roughly 20% per-enrollee growth into 2024, saw 42% in 2025, and projected 5% for 2026 against an actual 35%.

The 2025 step was structural and partly anticipated: the Inflation Reduction Act eliminated the coverage gap, introduced the $2,000 out-of-pocket cap, and moved catastrophic phase liability off federal reinsurance. What was not anticipated was the size, and the 2026 print says the step has not settled.

CBO's February 2026 baseline added $0.6 trillion to projected Part D outlays for 2025 through 2035, the largest single-program upward technical revision in the cycle, and the agency published a research call asking external actuaries and economists to explain the divergence. A nonpartisan scoring agency asking the outside world why its model is wrong is itself a finding.

Where the Liability Went

The mechanical driver is a reallocation, not a price increase.

Catastrophic Phase Liability Pre-2025 Post-2025
Federal reinsurance (non-applicable drugs) 80% 40%
Federal reinsurance (applicable/brand drugs) 80% 20%
Plan sponsor liability 15% 60%
Beneficiary cost sharing 5% 0% (capped at $2,000 annually)
Manufacturer discount (applicable drugs) N/A in catastrophic 20%

The pre-2025 structure put 80% of catastrophic phase cost on federal reinsurance, 15% on plans and 5% on the beneficiary. After the redesign, plan sponsors carry 60% on brand drugs and beneficiaries carry nothing above the cap. CMS aggregate reinsurance payments accordingly fell from 46% of total Part D spending in 2024 to 17% in 2025.

That reallocation is why the NAMBA moved from $64.28 to $179.45 in a single year. Plans absorbed liability previously spread across the federal government and the beneficiary, and the bid is where that shows up.

The pricing consequence is that specialty drug volume now hits plan costs through a much larger multiplier. A 10% increase in specialty volume concentrates in the catastrophic phase, where the plan share went from 15% to 60% of the marginal dollar, so the same utilization movement produces roughly four times the plan-level cost it would have under the prior design. Trend assumptions carried over from pre-redesign experience understate it structurally rather than by a calibration margin.

The behavioural half compounds it. Removing the 5% coinsurance above the cap removed the price signal that constrained catastrophic phase utilization, and first-year data shows that phase running approximately 22% above the Milliman and Wakely base cases. The direction was modelled; the magnitude was not.

GLP-1s are the visible case. Part D processed 21.8 million GLP-1 claims for $27.5 billion in gross spending in 2024, and after CMS dropped the BALANCE model for 2027 it extended the Medicare GLP-1 Bridge program through December 31, 2027 at a $50 monthly copay. Each million new Medicare GLP-1 users implies about $1.74 billion a year at the $245 negotiated price, or $890 million at the $149 starter dose.

Nor is the growth price-driven, which limits what rebate negotiation can recover. US net prescription drug spending grew 11.4% in 2024 to $487 billion against 4.9% in 2023, and the ASHP survey put overall pharmaceutical expenditure growth at 10.2% to $805.9 billion, of which utilization contributed 7.9% and new introductions 2.5% while existing drug prices were essentially flat.

The Part CBO Cannot Separate

The third force is the one that makes the first two hard to size, and it is why the research call exists.

The standalone PDP market has contracted 55% since the IRA passed, to a record low 360 plans for 2026 from 464 in 2025. Cigna, Clear Spring Health, Elevance Health and Mutual of Omaha have exited, and five companies, Aetna, Health Care Service Corporation, Humana, UnitedHealthcare and Wellcare, now account for 94% of all PDPs. A typical beneficiary sees eight to twelve options for 2026 against twelve to sixteen in 2025.

CBO's own language is careful: historically strong competition kept profit margins low, and recent instability "may be leading to less competition and higher profit margins." That is the standard consolidation dynamic, and it means part of the bid increase may be margin rather than expected cost.

The administrative line makes the ambiguity concrete. CMS revised its estimate of insurer overhead for 2026 from 6.5% to 11.4% of net benefit costs, close to a doubling. Some of that is genuine operational complexity under a redesigned benefit carrying new liability. Some of it may be margin sitting inside an administrative assumption, and CBO flagged the decomposition as exactly what it cannot do from the outside.

CMS has been treating the symptom meanwhile. The Part D Premium Stabilization Demonstration for 2026 cut the uniform base beneficiary premium reduction from $15 to $10, raised the allowable premium increase limit from $35 to $50, and dropped the narrowed risk corridor thresholds. The base beneficiary premium still rose 6% to $38.99 from $36.78.

So beneficiary premiums moved 6% while the bid moved 33%. The federal direct subsidy absorbs the difference, which is the $500 billion, and the agency scoring it has said it cannot currently tell how much of that gap is cost.

Further Reading

Sources