California's IVF coverage mandate may be delayed until 2026, leaving many in limbo

San Francisco Chronicle​

17-06-2025

California lawmakers are poised to delay the state's much-ballyhooed new law mandating in vitro fertilization insurance coverage for millions, set to take effect July 1. Gov. Gavin Newsom has asked lawmakers to push the implementation date to January 2026, leaving patients, insurers, and employers in limbo.
The law, SB 729, requires state-regulated health plans offered by large employers to cover infertility diagnosis and treatment, including IVF. Nine million people will qualify for coverage under the law. Advocates have praised the law as ' a major win for Californians,' especially in making same-sex couples and aspiring single parents eligible, though cost concerns limited the mandate's breadth.
People who had been planning fertility care based on the original timeline are now 'left in a holding pattern facing more uncertainty, financial strain, and emotional distress,' Alise Powell, a director at Resolve: The National Infertility Association, said in a statement.
During IVF, a patient's eggs are retrieved, combined with sperm in a lab, and then transferred to a person's uterus. A single cycle can total around $25,000, out of reach for many. The California law requires insurers to cover up to three egg retrievals and an unlimited number of embryo transfers.
Not everyone's coverage would be affected by the delay. Even if the law took effect July 1, it wouldn't require IVF coverage to start until the month an employer's contract renews with its insurer. Rachel Arrezola, a spokesperson for the California Department of Managed Health Care, said most of the employers subject to the law renew their contracts in January, so their employees would not be affected by a delay.
She declined to provide data on the percentage of eligible contracts that renew in July or later, which would mean those enrollees wouldn't get IVF coverage until at least a full year from now, in July 2026 or later.
The proposed new implementation date comes amid heightened national attention on fertility coverage. California is now one of 15 states with an IVF mandate, and in February, President Donald Trump signed an executive order seeking policy recommendations to expand IVF access.
It's the second time Newsom has asked lawmakers to delay the law. When the Democratic governor signed the bill in September, he asked the legislature to consider delaying implementation by six months. The reason, Newsom said then, was to allow time to reconcile differences between the bill and a broader effort by state regulators to include IVF and other fertility services as an essential health benefit, which would require the marketplace and other individual and small-group plans to provide the coverage.
Newsom spokesperson Elana Ross said the state needs more time to provide guidance to insurers on specific services not addressed in the law to ensure adequate and uniform coverage. Arrezola said embryo storage and donor eggs and sperm were some examples of services requiring more guidance.
Celeste Jale, a spokesperson for state Sen. Caroline Menjivar, a Democrat who authored the original IVF mandate, acknowledged a delay could frustrate people yearning to expand their families, but requested patience 'a little longer so we can roll this out right.'
Sean Tipton, a lobbyist for the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, contended that the few remaining questions on the mandate did not warrant a long delay.
Lawmakers appear poised to advance the delay to a vote by both houses of the Legislature, likely before the end of June. If a delay is approved and signed by the governor, the law would immediately be paused. If this does not happen before July 1, Arrezola said, the Department of Managed Health Care would enforce the mandate as it exists. All plans were required to submit compliance filings to the agency by March. Arrezola was unable to explain what would happen to IVF patients whose coverage had already begun if the delay passes after July 1.
The California Association of Health Plans, which opposed the mandate, declined to comment on where implementation efforts stand, although the group agrees that insurers need more guidance, spokesperson Mary Ellen Grant said.
Kaiser Permanente, the state's largest insurer, has already sent employers information that they can provide to their employees about the new benefit, company spokesperson Kathleen Chambers said. She added that eligible members whose plans renew on or after July 1 would have IVF coverage if implementation of the law is not delayed.
Employers and some fertility care providers appear to be grappling over the uncertainty of the law's start date. Amy Donovan, a lawyer at insurance brokerage and consulting firm Keenan & Associates, said the firm has fielded many questions from employers about the possibility of delay. Reproductive Science Center and Shady Grove Fertility, both major clinics serving different areas of California, posted on their websites that the IVF mandate had been delayed until January 2026, which is not yet the case. They did not respond to requests for comment.
Some infertility patients confused over whether and when they will be covered have run out of patience. Ana Rios and her wife, who live in the Central Valley, had been trying to have a baby for six years, dipping into savings for each failed treatment. Although she was 'freaking thrilled' to learn about the new law last fall, Rios could not get clarity from her employer or health plan on whether she was eligible for the coverage and when it would go into effect, she said. The couple decided to go to Mexico to pursue cheaper treatment options.
'You think you finally have a helping hand,' Rios said of learning about the law and then, later, the requested delay. 'You reach out, and they take it back.'