Biden-era subsidy being cut 40% by Trump administration

By Truman Lewis of ConsumerAffairs

• Medicare Part D premiums are set to rise sharply as a key federal subsidy is scaled back.

• The Trump administration plans to cut the subsidy program by 40% after it held premiums down in 2025.

• Officials and insurers brace for cost hikes driven by inflation, policy changes, and rising drug spending.

Millions of seniors enrolled in Medicare drug plans are likely to see substantial premium increases in 2026, as federal officials prepare to cut back a subsidy program that helped shield enrollees from escalating prescription drug costs this year.

The extra subsidylaunched by the Biden administration in 2025 to stabilize Part D drug plan premiumspumped $6.2 billion in federal funds into the program. That financial cushion helped keep monthly premiums for basic plans around $36, nearly 20% below what they would have been without the assistance, according to consulting firm Avalere Health, the Wall Street Journal reported.

But that buffer wont last.

The Trump administration, which is overseeing Medicares budget heading into 2026, is planning a 40% reduction in the subsidy, dropping monthly insurer support from $15 to $10 per enrollee, according to officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

This is all about trying to maintain affordability against a massively increasing backdrop of expense, said Chris Klomp, head of the Center for Medicare. But maintaining the full subsidy would have benefited a handful of insurers and cost an enormous, excess amount of taxpayer money, he added.

Premiums may spike for stand-alone Part D plans

The premium impact will vary widely by plan, but analysts and CMS officials say 2026 could bring the biggest year-over-year increases in years, especially for seniors enrolled in stand-alone Part D drug plans. These plans are often purchased alongside traditional Medicare, rather than bundled with Medicare Advantage, which typically includes drug coverage.

With the updated subsidy program:

• The annual cap on premium increases will rise from $35 (2025) to $50 (2026)

• Insurers will shoulder more risk, as federal protections against large losses are eliminated

• Remaining subsidies will save enrollees just $13.50/month on average off the higher rates

Inflation Reduction Act adds pressure

Insurers are also grappling with rising drug costs and new financial burdens stemming from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which redesigned the Part D program to reduce out-of-pocket costs for seniors.

That redesign, which took effect this year, limits how much seniors pay for medicationsbut it also shifts more liability onto insurers, who must now absorb a greater share of the total cost. Many insurers have flagged those changes in their 2026 bids to CMS, pushing up the baseline for premiums even before the subsidy cuts kick in.

Political and consumer impact

With tens of millions of seniors enrolled in Part D plans, the coming hikes could fuel political controversy in the run-up to the 2026 elections. Advocates worry the changes could push more seniors toward Medicare Advantage plans, where drug coverage is wrapped into a broader package but may include different provider restrictions and cost structures.

Medicare officials said they are working with insurers to temper increases where possible, but also acknowledged that cost pressures are intensifying across the board.

The HHS decision ignores scientific data and puts consumers at risk, the group says

By Truman Lewis of ConsumerAffairs

• HHS moves to schedule 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH) despite no confirmed deaths linked to the compound

• Critics say the decision ignores scientific data and could harm consumers relying on safe, tested alternatives

• Advocates warn the move benefits big kratom trade groups at the expense of public health and transparency

A coalition of plant-based medicine advocates is pushing back after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced plans to schedule 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), a compound derived from kratom. The move, which could eventually lead to a Schedule I classification, has drawn fierce criticism for what advocates describe as a data-free, politically motivated decision.

The Holistic Alternative Recovery Trust (HART), a nonprofit that promotes access to regulated plant-based therapies, issued a sharp rebuke shortly after the announcement. Jeff Smith, HARTs National Policy Director, questioned the rationale and transparency of the federal move.

No evidence was presented at todays press conference. Not a single study. Not one data point specific to 7-OH, said Smith. If 7-OH posed the kind of urgent danger that would justify emergency action, evidence would have been presented. It was not.

Regulatory focus called misplaced

Advocates argue that the decision to target 7-OH, a metabolite of mitragynine (the primary compound in kratom), is misguided, especially given that HHS simultaneously clarified that natural kratom leaf products are not the focus of the action.

Data from the FDAs own adverse event reporting system shows:

• Zero confirmed deaths linked to 7-OH alone

• Only three serious adverse events, two of which predated the current markets tested and labeled 7-OH products

• Conversely, 201 deaths have been linked to unregulated kratom leaf products, with 48 serious adverse events reported in Q1 2025 alone

Why target 7-OH instead of kratom leaf, which has a far worse safety profile? asked Smith. This action defies logic unless other interests are driving policy.

Lower toxicity, dependence risk, advocates say

HART points to preclinical research suggesting that 7-OH is less toxic than mitragynine, does not cause respiratory depression at therapeutic doses, and has a lower dependence potential than opioids.

While the FDA has framed its effort as a response to rising concerns about addiction, HART and other experts argue that responsible, tested, and regulated use of 7-OH offers a viable harm-reduction tool one that could help reduce reliance on more dangerous opioids.

In a pointed statement, HART accused large kratom industry groups of scapegoating 7-OH to protect their market share, including funding staged protests and promoting consumer testimony based on hearsay rather than personal experience.

The FDA needs to hear from researchers, toxicologists, and addiction science experts and from the American people, said Smith. Cutting off access helps no one, but it will hurt many.

What's next?

If 7-OH is placed under Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, it would be deemed to have no accepted medical use, high abuse potential, and no safety margin, effectively banning its sale and use. HART and other advocacy groups are calling on consumers and scientists to submit public comments, contact their lawmakers, and demand a science-based regulatory approach.

For background on kratom and the FDA's recent crackdown, see ConsumerAffairs coverage: FDA Plans Action Against Kratom, a Potent Opioid Alternative

It should be as easy to cancel as it is to sign up, the bill's sponsor said

• New bill would make it as easy to cancel a subscription as it is to sign up.

• Backs a blocked FTC rule aimed at reining in deceptive cancellation practices.

• Consumer advocates call it a commonsense step to protect Americans from corporate tricks.

U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) today introduced the Click-to-Cancel Act of 2025, a bill designed to eliminate the frustrating barriers many consumers face when trying to cancel online subscriptions.

The legislation would codify a Federal Trade Commission rule that was recently blocked in court. That rule sought to require businesses to make subscription cancellations as straightforward as the signup process, a move that had won broad public support before its legal setback.

Consumers shouldnt have to jump through hoops to cancel a subscription they signed up for with a single click, said J.B. Branch, Big Tech accountability advocate at Public Citizen. Shermans bill offers a simple, commonsense solution to a widespread problem: companies trapping people in costly subscriptions with deceptive and deliberately difficult cancellation processes.

Gyms, streamers, e-commerce

The issue spans industriesfrom gyms and streaming services to apps and e-commerce platformswith consumers often reporting long hold times, hidden links, and misleading prompts designed to prevent cancellation. These tactics have become a key profit center for companies banking on user forgetfulness and frustration.

Americans are tired of being scammed, Branch added. Congress should move swiftly to protect consumers from these predatory practices.

The Click-to-Cancel Act is expected to draw support from consumer rights organizations and regulatory advocates. However, it could face resistance from business groups concerned about compliance costs and limitations on marketing tactics.

Shermans office has not yet announced a hearing date, but legislative watchers say the bill could gain momentum as lawmakers sharpen their focus on tech accountability and consumer protection heading into the 2026 election cycle.

Possible metal pieces could cause choking and lacerations

Michigan-based Ada Valley Meat Company has issued a recall for approximately 1,065 pounds of fully cooked frozen ground beef after a consumer complaint revealed possible metal contamination, according to an announcement Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Agricultures Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).

The affected product is:

• "Ada Valley FULLY COOKED GROUND BEEF"

• Packaged in 20-lb. cardboard boxes, each containing four 5-lb. plastic bags

• Production Dates: May 28, 2025 (Lot Code 35156) and May 30, 2025 (Lot Code 35157)

• Bears the establishment number EST. 10031 within the USDA inspection mark

This ground beef was distributed to food establishments and distributors in California, Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

The recall was initiated after Ada Valley notified FSIS of a consumer report alleging that pieces of metal were found in the beef. Although no injuries have been confirmed at this time, federal officials urge caution. Consumers experiencing any symptoms or concerns should seek medical attention.

Warning to Institutions

FSIS has issued a particular warning for institutional buyers, such as schools, hospitals, and cafeterias, who may have stored the product in freezers. These institutions are strongly advised not to serve the recalled beef. It should be discarded or returned to the point of purchase.

Furthermore, due to possible redistribution or reprocessing, some of the recalled product may carry a different establishment number. FSIS urges consumers and institutions to closely examine all product labels, and notes that the recall scope may expand as the investigation continues.

FSIS will continue conducting recall effectiveness checks to ensure that affected parties are properly notified and the product is removed from circulation. A list of retail locations involved will be published on the FSIS recall website as it becomes available.

Consumer Contacts

• Ada Valley Meat Company
  Contact: Gerrit Rozeboom, President
  Email: gerrit@adavalley.com

• USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline: 888-MPHotline (888-674-6854)

• Food Complaint System: https://foodcomplaint.fsis.usda.gov/eCCF/

Why This Matters

While no injuries have been reported, metal fragments in food pose serious choking and laceration hazards. This recall highlights the importance of rapid response mechanisms in the food industry and the role of consumer vigilance in spotting dangerous contamination.

ConsumerAffairs will continue to monitor updates from FSIS and Ada Valley for any expansion of the recall or confirmed injury reports.

The company said it will pass on some of the tariff costs to consumers

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• P&G will raise prices on roughly 25% of its U.S. product portfolio starting in August.

• The increases, averaging mid-single digits (~23%), are designed to offset about $1billion in new tariff-driven costs in fiscal 2026.

• While quarterly earnings beat expectations, the company revised its full-year forecast downward and announced cost-cutting and leadership changes.

Consumers may begin to feel more of the effects of tariffs in the coming weeks. Procter & Gamble, a major manufacturer of household products, has confirmed it will impose price increases on approximately onequarter of its U.S. product lineup beginning next month, in response to steep new tariffs impacting its supply chain.

The company said recent duties on imports from China, Canada and other countries are expected to cost about $1billion before taxes in fiscal 2026, prompting the decision to adjust consumer prices accordingly.

P&Gs chief financial officer, Andre Schulten, described average increases in the mid-single-digit range for affected SKUs, emphasizing that pricing will vary by category and retailer partnership. The company has already shared these plans with major clients like Walmart and Target.

Sticker shock

For households and small businesses relying on staples like Tide, Pampers, Crest, Bounty, and other P&G brands, sticker shock could emerge at checkout starting in August. While the overall rise may seem modest, concentrated increases on frequently purchased items could strain budgets.

Meanwhile, retailers and analysts expect consumers to explore cheaper alternatives or delay purchases to manage expenses.

P&G manufactures nearly 90% of its products in the U.S., so that isnt the problem. The tariff pain mainly stems from imported raw materials and packaging, predominantly sourced from China.