What are projected out‑of‑pocket premium changes by income bracket if enhanced subsidies expire in 2026?

Checked on December 19, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.

Executive summary

If the enhanced premium tax credits (ePTCs) expire at the end of 2025, federal analyses and nonprofit researchers project substantial increases in out‑of‑pocket premium payments across income groups — on average more than doubling for subsidized enrollees and rising by hundreds to thousands of dollars depending on income and age [1] [2]. The burden will be concentrated among people under 400% of the federal poverty level (FPL) who now benefit most from the enhancements, but middle‑ and higher‑income families who briefly gained eligibility will also face steep increases or loss of aid [3] [4].

1. What “expiration” changes in the subsidy rules — and who it affects

The ePTCs temporarily capped benchmark plan premium contributions at lower percentages of income through 2025 and expanded eligibility above 400% FPL; those protections are scheduled to lapse Jan. 1, 2026 under current law, returning required contribution schedules and the old 400% cap unless Congress acts [5] [6]. That reversion means people between 100%–150% of FPL who can now get zero‑dollar premiums would again face a nonzero share of income, and many over 400% could lose subsidy eligibility entirely [5] [2].

2. How much payments would rise for lower‑ and moderate‑income enrollees

Analyses find the largest proportional jumps for lower‑ and moderate‑income enrollees: KFF estimates average subsidized enrollees would see annual premium payments rise by about $1,016 in 2026 absent an extension — a 114% increase from 2025 averages — and Urban Institute projects average net premiums for those below 250% FPL could rise from $169 to $919 in 2026 under standard PTCs [1] [3] [2]. Across incomes below 400% of FPL, KFF maps show out‑of‑pocket premiums would increase by “hundreds of dollars to over $1,500 per person on average,” reflecting the restored higher applicable percentages and updated IRS contribution caps [2] [6].

3. What happens to middle‑income and just‑above‑cap households

Middle‑income households that briefly benefited from the expansion — including many between roughly 300%–500% of FPL — face large dollar increases: Urban Institute finds net premiums for some above 400% would nearly double from $4,436 to $8,471 if they lose subsidies, while other analyses cite examples such as a 40‑year‑old earning $50,000 who could pay roughly $2,000 more in 2026 [3] [7]. The Bipartisan Policy Center highlights extreme cases for older couples near the former 400% threshold, where premiums could leap to many thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars annually without the enhancement [4].

4. Insurer filings and state variation — a more mixed picture on premium rate effects

Insurer rate filings and state circumstances complicate the headline numbers: some insurers expect modest additional gross premium increases of only 1%–7% because state policy, state‑level subsidies, or market dynamics can blunt or amplify effects, and some expect healthier enrollees to drop coverage raising average costs for remaining enrollees [8]. Analysts caution that insurer expectations are early and incomplete, and national estimates of out‑of‑pocket burden reflect both subsidy changes and projected shifts in the risk pool [8] [6].

5. Coverage and broader fiscal projections tied to premium changes

Empirical projections tie these premium hikes to coverage losses and fiscal tradeoffs: CBO and Joint Committee estimates show extending enhancements would expand coverage by millions over the coming decade, while non‑extension is projected to increase uninsurance by millions in 2026 and beyond — findings echoed by Urban Institute and CBPP analyses [5] [3] [9]. These studies also note that reversing the ePTCs could raise benchmark premiums and shrink enrollment, which then feeds back into higher net premiums for remaining enrollees [5] [3].

6. Limits of available reporting and what remains unresolved

The public reports provide clear ranges and illustrative examples but not a single, uniformly tabulated “by‑bracket” table that maps exact dollar or percent changes for every income band and demographic; estimates vary by age, location, family size, and insurer assumptions, and some state policies (e.g., Vermont, Oregon) will alter local impacts [8] [2]. Final, personalized out‑of‑pocket changes for any household therefore require the KFF calculator or similar tools using local 2026 premiums and individual income and family structure [10].

Want to dive deeper?
How do the restored 2026 ACA applicable percentage caps map to specific FPL income brackets (100%, 150%, 200%, 300%, 400%)?
What state‑level policies (state subsidies or Basic Health Plans) are in place that would offset federal subsidy expirations in 2026?
How do insurer rate filings published for 2026 vary across states and what do they imply for net premiums after subsidy changes?