Doctors Could Dispense Medicare Drugs In-Office Until 2030 Under New Exception to Anti-Fraud Law

The “Seniors’ Access to Critical Medications Act of 2025” is making a significant, temporary change to how Medicare patients get their prescriptions. Essentially, this bill carves out a five-year exception (starting January 1, 2026, and ending December 31, 2030) to the federal anti-fraud law known as the Stark Law, allowing doctors to dispense certain Medicare Part D prescription drugs directly to their patients from their practice. This isn't a free-for-all, though: the exception requires the patient to have had an in-person, Medicare-covered visit with the doctor within the last year, and the dispensing must be done by the physician or their supervised staff right out of the office (SEC. 2).

The Fine Print on Physician Dispensing

Why does this matter? The Stark Law usually prevents doctors from referring patients to services they own or have a financial relationship with, precisely to stop doctors from ordering unnecessary tests or services just to make more money. This bill temporarily lifts that restriction for certain drugs. For a busy senior, this could mean serious convenience—instead of driving to the pharmacy after a doctor’s appointment, they walk out with their meds in hand. For a doctor’s office, this opens up a new revenue stream and more control over the patient experience. The drugs can be picked up in person or even mailed to the patient, adding flexibility (SEC. 2).

But here’s the catch: whenever you create an exception to a rule designed to prevent conflicts of interest, you have to watch for potential abuses. Will doctors now be more likely to prescribe a higher-cost drug just because they happen to stock it in their office? This is why the bill includes a mandatory study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The GAO has three years to investigate pharmacies and practices that start dispensing significantly more Medicare Part D drugs because of this change. They have to look at which medical specialties are doing this, what the contract terms look like, and what steps doctors are taking to manage potential conflicts of interest (SEC. 2).

Who Feels the Pinch (and the Convenience)?

This change creates winners and losers. For Medicare patients, the convenience factor is a clear win. Imagine you’re dealing with a chronic condition and need a specific medication—getting it right at the point of care saves time and hassle. For physician group practices, this is a financial opportunity, allowing them to integrate dispensing services. On the flip side, this could significantly impact independent retail pharmacies, especially those in smaller communities, who might see their business shrink as more prescriptions are filled directly by doctors. This is a classic policy trade-off: convenience versus preserving the traditional pharmacy business model.

Finally, the bill includes a small but notable detail: it slightly reduces the money allocated to the Medicare Improvement Fund. This fund, which is used for various quality and efficiency improvements within Medicare, is being cut by $18 million (from $1,804,000,000 to $1,786,000,000) (SEC. 3). While $18 million is a rounding error in the context of the entire Medicare budget, it’s still $18 million less available for future Medicare enhancements and initiatives.