In the American healthcare, few issues resonate as deeply with patients, providers, and employers as price transparency and surprise billing. For too long, patients have been blindsided by unexpected medical bills, often discovering costs only after receiving care. Employers, footing the bill for millions of insured workers, are increasingly vocal about the need for clear pricing to curb runaway costs. Federal mandates, like the Hospital Price Transparency Rule and the No Surprises Act, aim to bring clarity and fairness to this chaotic system. But nearly five years into these regulations, their impact remains a mixed bag—celebrated by some, criticized by others, and still evolving. This longread dives into the complexities of price transparency, the fight against surprise billing, and what it all means for the American healthcare consumer.
The Push for Price Transparency: A Game-Changer or a Paper Tiger?
The idea behind price transparency is simple: if patients know the cost of healthcare services upfront, they can shop around, compare providers, and make informed decisions. Since January 1, 2021, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has required hospitals to post pricing information in two key ways: a comprehensive machine-readable file listing all services and their costs, and a consumer-friendly display of at least 300 “shoppable” services, like knee surgeries or MRIs [1]. These rules, rooted in the Affordable Care Act, aim to empower consumers and foster competition to drive down costs.
But compliance is a sticking point. A 2024 report from the Office of Inspector General found that 37% of sampled hospitals failed to fully meet these requirements, with issues ranging from incomplete machine-readable files to missing consumer-friendly displays [2]. CMS has stepped up enforcement, conducting over 1,287 audits between 2021 and 2023 and issuing over $4 million in fines to 14 noncompliant hospitals, but only two hospitals have faced penalties, suggesting a lenient approach [3]. The American Hospital Association (AHA) notes that 70% of hospitals complied with both components of the rule in 2022, a leap from 27% in 2021, but third-party reports, like one from PatientRightsAdvocate.org, claim widespread noncompliance, citing inconsistent data formats [4].
Hospitals face real challenges. Smaller facilities, in particular, struggle with the technical and financial burden of creating and maintaining these files. Many lack the resources to standardize complex pricing data, especially when negotiated rates with insurers vary widely [5]. The AHA highlights that pricing for a single procedure can involve hundreds of variables, from bundled services to insurer-specific discounts, complicating compliance [5].
Can Patients Actually Use This Information?
Even when hospitals comply, the practical utility of price transparency data is questionable. Machine-readable files, often massive spreadsheets with thousands of rows, are designed for developers and researchers, not everyday patients [1]. Consumer-friendly displays of shoppable services sound promising, but prices can vary based on insurance plans, provider contracts, or billing structures. For example, a 2021 New York Times investigation found a pregnancy test at one hospital cost $93 for one insurer’s patients but $10 for the uninsured [6]. Such discrepancies confuse rather than clarify.
Patients also face logistical hurdles. Most don’t “shop” for healthcare like they do for cars or groceries. In emergencies, price comparisons are irrelevant. Even for elective procedures, factors like provider reputation, location, or physician recommendations often outweigh cost. A 2023 Experian Health study found that 60% of patients who received inaccurate estimates or surprise bills would switch providers for a better payment experience, underscoring the demand for usable data [7]. Yet, without user-friendly tools or widespread education, these mandates risk becoming bureaucratic exercises.
Technology could bridge this gap. Startups and third-party developers are creating apps to parse machine-readable files, offering patients clearer cost comparisons [1]. CMS encourages such innovation, but the lack of standardized file formats remains a barrier. Imagine a world where you could plug your insurance details into an app and instantly compare out-of-pocket costs for a hip replacement across local hospitals. That vision exists, but we’re not there yet.
Employer Pressure: The Sleeping Giant
Employers, who cover healthcare for nearly 180 million Americans, are a driving force behind transparency. As healthcare costs eat into corporate budgets—averaging $15,000 per employee annually—large employers like Walmart and General Motors demand better data to negotiate with providers and insurers [8]. The 2021 New York Times report revealed how opaque pricing frustrates employers, with procedures like colonoscopies varying tenfold across providers [6]. This fuels their push for policies that expose and standardize costs.
Employers are also leveraging their clout to influence plan designs. Some steer employees toward high-value providers through tiered networks or centers of excellence, balancing quality and cost. Others explore direct contracts with hospitals to bypass insurers’ opaque pricing models. The Business Group on Health, representing large employers, has called for CMS to enforce stricter compliance and improve data usability, estimating that transparency could save billions annually [9]. This pressure is reshaping the market, forcing providers to compete on price and quality.
The No Surprises Act: A Shield Against Shock Bills
The No Surprises Act, effective January 1, 2022, protects patients from unexpected out-of-network bills, known as “balance billing.” Before the law, patients could face thousands in charges from out-of-network providers—like an anesthesiologist—at in-network facilities. The Act bans balance billing for emergency services, non-emergency care at in-network hospitals, and air ambulance services, ensuring patients pay only in-network cost-sharing rates [10]. It also requires providers to give uninsured or self-pay patients Good Faith Estimates (GFEs) of expected costs, with a dispute process if final bills exceed the estimate by $400 or more [10].
By 2023, CMS reported the Act was reducing surprise bills, but implementation challenges persist [11]. The advanced explanation of benefits (AEOB) requirement, which would provide insured patients with pre-treatment cost estimates, remains stalled due to regulatory delays [12]. Providers and insurers, including the AHA, argue that regulating out-of-network rates could incentivize insurers to lower in-network payments, squeezing providers [13]. Lawsuits, like Texas Medical Association v. HHS, have challenged the independent dispute resolution (IDR) process, citing flaws in CMS’s methodology [14]. Despite these hurdles, the Act has given patients a vital shield against financial shock.
Ongoing Disputes and the Road Ahead
The fight for transparency and billing fairness is ongoing. CMS plans stricter monitoring and penalties in 2025, while a 2025 executive order calls for “actual prices, not estimates” in machine-readable files [15]. Hospitals argue that CMS’s one-size-fits-all approach ignores pricing complexity, especially for smaller facilities [5]. Patients remain caught in the middle, with data that’s often inaccessible without better tools or education.
Employers continue to push, but systemic change requires cooperation across hospitals, insurers, regulators, and tech innovators. Transparent pricing could lower costs through competition, while surprise billing protections restore trust. But without robust enforcement, standardized data, and patient-centric tools, these reforms risk falling short. As Riley Matthews of Experian Health noted, “Patients are definitely here for these mandates” [7]. The question is whether the system can deliver.
What Can You Do?
Patients should request Good Faith Estimates for scheduled care and verify provider network status. Employers should push insurers for transparent pricing tools and advocate for employee education. Providers must invest in compliance, partnering with firms like Cleverley + Associates to streamline data [16]. Policymakers need to balance enforcement with flexibility, supporting both small hospitals and large systems.
The U.S. healthcare system is a behemoth, but price transparency and surprise billing protections are cracks in its opaque foundation. With persistence, these reforms could empower patients and employers to demand a fairer, more competitive market where costs are clear and surprises are rare.
References
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2021). Hospital Price Transparency. https://www.cms.gov/hospital-price-transparency
- Office of Inspector General. (2024). Hospital Price Transparency Compliance Report.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2023). Hospital Price Transparency Enforcement Actions. https://www.cms.gov
- PatientRightsAdvocate.org. (2022). Hospital Price Transparency Compliance Report.
- American Hospital Association. (2022). Price Transparency Compliance Trends.
- Kliff, S. (2021). Why Hospital Bills Are So Confusing. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com
- Experian Health. (2023). Patient Payment Experience Survey.
- National Business Group on Health. (2023). Healthcare Cost Trends.
- Business Group on Health. (2022). Employer Perspectives on Healthcare Transparency.
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2022). No Surprises Act Overview. https://www.cms.gov/nosurprises
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2023). No Surprises Act Implementation Report.
- Kaiser Family Foundation. (2023). No Surprises Act: Implementation Challenges.
- American Hospital Association. (2022). No Surprises Act Concerns.
- Texas Medical Association v. HHS. (2022). U.S. District Court Ruling.
- Executive Order on Healthcare Price Transparency. (2025). White House.
- Cleverley + Associates. (2023). Hospital Pricing Solutions.
Discover more from Doctor Trusted
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
