When HSA dollars go into direct primary care, control follows

Effective January 1, 2026, Health Savings Account funds may be used to pay for Direct Primary Care (DPC) membership. The change has been seen as an access milestone for some time. In fact, this is a marketing design exercise.

Policy shifts rarely work alone. When tax-advantaged funds enter the care model, they do more than expand purchasing power. They reorganize incentives, accelerate intermediary participation, and clarify who has influence. The weeks leading up to January 1 have shown that platforms, benefits providers and provider groups are already actively mobilizing to deal with the transfer of funds.

Changes in HSA rules don't just make DPCs more affordable. It transforms DPC from a care relationship into a financial product category. Once this shift occurs, control follows the infrastructure.

Real transformation: from care relationships to financial products

Much of the early discussion about HSA eligibility focused on affordability. This framework ignores more important implications.

When care is funded primarily through employer-sponsored arrangements, decisions are influenced by benefit design, workforce strategy, and organizational purchasing power. Behavior changes when care is funded with individual HSA funds. Consumers compare products, evaluate price differences, and respond to marketing signals. What was once relational has become transactional.

This is the key point in the entire debate. HSA eligibility introduces price discovery into a model that has historically minimized it. This dynamic favors entities that can aggregate demand, standardize products, and reduce friction among large populations. It also explains why infrastructure ownership, not clinical philosophy, now determines scale.

Three control models are emerging

As HSA dollars enter the DPC ecosystem, three different control models are consolidating. Each operates with a different form of leverage.

1. Physician-controlled DPC

Independent physician-led practices remain the philosophical foundation of direct primary care. Their strengths are trust, continuity and clinical autonomy.

Once consumers begin evaluating DPC through an HSA lens, these practices become more open to comparison shopping risks. Without aggregation or employer anchoring, pricing rules will become more difficult to maintain and marketing reach will become a limitation. Trust is still an advantage. Price sensitivity becomes a risk.

2. Employer-anchored DPC

In the employer-anchored model, DPC is considered infrastructure rather than a benefit. HSA qualifications supplement, not replace, employer investments. Employers retain control over benefit arrangements, pricing logic, and data governance, while physicians remain strategic partners rather than interchangeable suppliers.

The leverage here comes from contracting rights, benefits integration and ownership of workforce health data. The vulnerability is operational rather than structural. This model requires thoughtful design, internal coordination and compliance discipline to sustain.

3. Platform controlled DPC

Platform-controlled models are optimized for scale. They efficiently aggregate HSA funds, standardize pricing, and centralize enrollment and data flows.

Vulnerabilities arise when pricing power, data control, and physician economics are structurally locked into the platform itself.

Employers now face an immediate choice

As the first quarter of 2026 begins, employers are no longer evaluating future options. They are operating in a dynamic market transition.

Employers retain influence not by default but by design. Their influence comes from company contracting rights, benefits integration and employee data management. These advantages will only last if applied deliberately.

Organizations making decisions in the first quarter of 2026 will set the DPC architecture for the next three to five years. Those who wait until mid-year will choose from models that have already taken shape in the platform economy and early market capture.

Compliance becomes infrastructure

HSA qualifications increase regulatory risk structurally rather than incrementally.

Some compliance vectors arise again when employer funds intersect with personal HSA funds. Non-discriminatory considerations arise when benefit structures are uneven across employee categories. Since pricing incorporates both employer and individual contributions, fair market value documentation becomes critical. Data governance and HIPAA responsibilities are enhanced when platforms serve as the relationship between employers, physicians, and members.

These risks rarely surface at launch. They arise later during an audit, benefit redesign, or ownership transition. Employers who view compliance as part of their infrastructure can remain flexible as the market evolves.

Strategy, not emotion

The January 1 rule change does not mark a victory for the DPC. It marked the beginning of a phase in which governance, not philosophy, determined outcomes.

For employers evaluating programs now, three questions are more important than any price comparison:

The winning organizations are those that design for scale now, locking in structures that are optimized for everyone else’s economics ahead of the March budget cycle.

Photo: megaflopp, Getty Images

This article appeared in Medical City Influencers program. Anyone can share their thoughts on healthcare business and innovation on MedCity News through MedCity Influencers. Click here to learn how.