How are Alaska and Hawaii FPL amounts calculated differently from the contiguous U.S. in 2026?

1. Two FPLs, one reason: cost-of-living adjustments for islands and frontier states

The federal guidelines explicitly set separate poverty guideline dollar amounts for Alaska and Hawaii because their living costs differ from the contiguous U.S.; HHS publishes higher per-person FPL figures for those two states and federal program rules apply those state-specific numbers when checking eligibility ^{[3] [1]}.

2. How the math differs in practice: same method, different base numbers

Calculation mechanics are identical: programs and rules apply a percentage or multiple of the FPL (for example, 100% FPL for Medicaid eligibility or an affordability percentage to set employer safe-harbor monthly caps). The practical difference is the base FPL number used — Alaska’s and Hawaii’s higher base yields larger dollar thresholds even though the formulas don’t change ^{[3] [1]}.

3. Real examples for 2025 figures that feed 2026 coverage decisions

For a single person the listed 2025 FPLs are $15,650 (contiguous U.S.), $17,990 (Hawaii) and $19,550 (Alaska). Those 2025 numbers are commonly used to determine Medicaid/CHIP eligibility and to calculate Marketplace savings for the following year; marketplaces use the prior year’s FPL for next-year coverage calculations, so 2025 FPLs inform many 2026 subsidy determinations ^{[2] [3] [1]}.

4. Employer affordability thresholds illustrate the downstream effect

Mercer’s explanation of the 2026 affordability percentage shows how a higher state FPL increases monthly safe-harbor limits: applying 9.96% to Alaska’s $19,550 and dividing by 12 gives $162.27/month, and applying it to Hawaii’s $17,990 gives $149.32/month — both higher than the mainland-based limit derived from $15,650 ^[4].

5. Where timing and technical rules matter: which year’s FPL gets used

Marketplace and employer-plan rules use FPLs on a year-lag or plan-year basis. Health marketplaces use prior-year FPLs to calculate subsidies for the next coverage year; non-calendar employer plans may use the FPL in effect within six months before plan-year start, so some 2026 plan years might still apply 2025 FPLs or choose the newly issued 2026 FPL when available ^{[2] [4]}.

6. Policy implications and hidden effects

Higher FPLs for Alaska and Hawaii make more people in those states eligible for income-tied programs at a given dollar income and raise affordability safe-harbor ceilings — a de facto recognition of higher costs but also a floor that can affect subsidy size, employer contributions, and Medicaid thresholds ^{[3] [1] [4]}. Available sources do not mention whether those adjustments fully reflect local cost differences across every county or region within those states.

7. Disagreements, limits and what reporting doesn’t say

Sources agree that Alaska and Hawaii have higher FPL figures and that prior-year FPLs are often used for next-year Marketplace calculations ^{[2] [3] [1]}. There is variation in guidance about non-calendar-year employer plans’ choices and timing; Mercer highlights plan-year timing nuances that could yield different practical outcomes depending on when HHS issues the 2026 guidelines ^[4]. Available sources do not mention the exact 2026 FPL numbers or whether Congress will change the year-lag convention for Marketplace calculations.

8. Bottom line for residents and benefits administrators

The formulas determining eligibility and affordability don’t change across states; the difference is the higher Alaska and Hawaii FPL bases, which increase dollar-limited tests (eligibility cutoffs, monthly employer safe-harbor caps) for people in those states. Administrators and enrollees should track whether a plan uses the 2025 or newly issued 2026 FPL, because that choice can materially change subsidy and affordability calculations ^{[2] [4] [3]}.