Colorado’s five largest health insurers are warning that policyholders could face substantial premium increases next year as lawmakers continue debating whether to impose a new $40 million fee on carriers to help stabilize the state’s health‑insurance affordability programs.

The proposal, originally included in Senate Bill 178, was designed to help close a projected $139 million shortfall in 2027 for the Health Insurance Affordability Enterprise — the program that funds subsidies for lower‑income Coloradans who buy coverage on the individual market. State Insurance Commissioner Michael Conway has repeatedly emphasized that the gap must be addressed to prevent tens of thousands of residents from losing financial assistance.

Insurers, however, argue that the fee would land squarely on consumers. Representatives from Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cigna, Kaiser Permanente, and UnitedHealthcare testified that the assessment would be passed directly into premiums. Aetna estimated that the fee alone could raise monthly costs by about $40.40 per member, or nearly $480 per year, warning that the increase could push some Coloradans to drop coverage entirely.

The political landscape shifted this week when lawmakers removed the fee from the bill during committee negotiations. Supporters framed the change as a temporary adjustment rather than a retreat, noting that the funding gap remains and that the Legislature may revisit the fee before the session ends. Opponents, meanwhile, say the amendment validates concerns about affordability and the risk of driving premiums higher at a time when many families are already struggling with rising costs.

Even without the fee in place, insurers say the debate underscores a larger tension in Colorado’s health‑care system: the state’s commitment to subsidizing coverage for lower‑income residents versus the financial pressure on carriers and consumers. With the 2027 shortfall still looming, lawmakers will likely face renewed pressure to find a long‑term solution — one that avoids destabilizing the very market the state is trying to support.