Back to Bills

Allow Health Accounts To Cover Supplements

Full Title:
Dietary Supplements Access Act

Summary#

This bill would let people use certain tax-advantaged health accounts to pay for dietary supplements. It adds a new rule saying dietary supplements count as “medical care” for Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), Archer MSAs, health Flexible Spending Arrangements (FSAs), and Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRAs). The allowance is limited to $500 per taxpayer per year (and $250 if married and filing a separate return). The bill uses the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act definition of “dietary supplement” and says the term does not include energy drinks, soft drinks, or soda.

  • Main change: Treats up to $500 per year of spending on dietary supplements as eligible medical expenses for HSAs, Archer MSAs, FSAs, and HRAs ($250 if married filing separately).
  • Definition: Uses the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act definition of “dietary supplement.”
  • Exclusion: Explicitly excludes products marketed or commonly understood as energy drinks, soft drinks, or soda.
  • Effective dates: Applies to amounts paid after Dec 31, 2025 for account distributions and to expenses incurred after Dec 31, 2025 for reimbursements.

What it means for you#

  • People with HSAs or Archer MSAs: You could use your HSA or Archer MSA funds to pay for dietary supplements and treat those payments as qualified medical distributions, up to $500 per year ($250 if married filing separately), for amounts paid after Dec 31, 2025.
  • People with FSAs or HRAs: You could get reimbursed from an FSA or HRA for dietary supplements you buy after Dec 31, 2025, up to the same dollar limits.
  • Consumers who buy supplements: Some supplement purchases could be paid with pre-tax or tax-free health account money. Which products qualify will depend on the FD&C Act definition and the exclusion for energy/soft drinks.
  • Employers and plan administrators: Plan documents and eligible-expense lists will likely need updating. Plans will need procedures to limit reimbursements to the $500/$250 cap and to decide how to verify eligible purchases.
  • Taxpayers and tax preparers: The new rule affects what counts as a tax-free medical expense from these accounts. Tax preparers will need to account for the cap and the effective dates.

What is unclear: The bill does not say how plans must verify that a purchase is a qualifying dietary supplement (for example, what receipts or product descriptions are needed). It also does not give guidance on how mixed-use products or borderline items would be treated beyond the stated exclusions.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

  • The bill’s text does not include a fiscal note or an estimate of changes in federal revenue.
  • Possible budget effects (inferred): Allowing tax-free use of HSA/FSA/HRA funds for supplements could reduce federal tax revenue, but the bill provides no estimate.
  • Possible administrative costs (inferred): Employers and plan administrators may face costs to update plan rules, claims systems, and recordkeeping to implement the new eligible expense category and annual caps.
  • No fees or new penalties are specified in the bill.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to increase access to dietary supplements by letting people use tax-advantaged health accounts to pay for them.
  • Supporters may argue this gives consumers more freedom to use health dollars for preventive or supplementary products.
  • Using the FD&C Act definition aims to provide a clear legal standard for what counts as a dietary supplement.
  • The $500 yearly cap limits the amount allowed and may be seen as a way to prevent large-scale use of health accounts for supplements.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is that the bill does not explain how to verify that a purchase is a qualifying supplement, which could make enforcement difficult.
  • The definition based on the FD&C Act, plus only a few explicit exclusions, could leave gray areas about borderline products and mixed-use items.
  • Another concern is potential lost tax revenue from expanding what counts as a tax-free medical expense; the bill provides no cost estimate.
  • Plans and employers may face extra administrative work and costs to track the new eligible expenses and apply the annual caps.
  • It is unclear whether medical necessity or a prescription would ever be required; the bill treats supplements as eligible without such a requirement.