02/27/2026
📣 *Why TN’s HB1959/SB2040 could boost free markets, lower costs & expand pharmacy choice
TN’s proposed bill would stop PBMs from owning or operating retail pharmacies—forcing companies like CVS to divest their vertically integrated structures where the same corporate owner runs the PBM and the pharmacy. Supporters argue that:
✅ More competition = lower prices
When PBMs don’t steer prescriptions to pharmacies they also own, independent and local pharmacies can compete on price and service instead of being squeezed out by conglomerates. The current integrated model lets PBMs put their own pharmacies at an advantage in contracts and reimbursement, which critics say contributes to higher drug costs overall.
✅ Greater choice for patients
Without ownership ties, PBMs would have less ability to favor one pharmacy over another — meaning patients could truly choose where they fill prescriptions rather than being nudged toward affiliated outlets.
✅ Leveling the playing field for independents
Independent pharmacies currently struggle to negotiate with large PBMs because PBM-owned pharmacies can both set reimbursement terms and benefit from them. Breaking that link helps smaller pharmacies stay open and compete.
This approach mirrors Arkansas’ Act 624 — the first state law to ban PBM ownership of pharmacies — now tied up in court but aimed at the same goal: reducing conflicts of interest and boosting market competition.
A coalition of Tennessee lawmakers is sponsoring legislation to rein in unfair business practices by companies such as healthcare giant CVS.
