MiGeL purchases abroad: committee wants a cost calculation first
Care associations doubt the benefit of the planned opening for private EEA purchases. The new reimbursement option has not yet been decided.
The Health Committee of the National Council is calling for additional calculations before it decides on the reimbursement of medical devices bought privately abroad. In its statement of 30 October, it commissioned the administration to carry out clarifications and intends to resume deliberations in the first quarter of 2027. The Federal Council's proposal is therefore not yet a new purchasing rule for insured persons.
What is disputed is how much the opening would actually save and who could benefit from it. Christian Streit, managing director of the nursing home association Senesuisse, told Medinside it was "a drop in the ocean". Spitex Schweiz rejects the bill in its current form. The health insurers' association Prio.Swiss, by contrast, welcomes the direction but calls for clear product limits and a simple process.
The proposal targets private buyers
On 24 June 2026 the Federal Council adopted a dispatch on amending the Health Insurance Act. Certain aids and devices that insured persons buy privately in the European Economic Area, or EEA, should in future be reimbursable under basic insurance. The sometimes lower prices are also intended to stimulate competition within Switzerland.
According to the federal government, such private purchases abroad are currently not reimbursed as a rule. This rests on the principle of territoriality: benefits are generally provided or obtained within the country. The proposal would loosen this boundary for selected medical devices. Medicinal products are expressly not part of the change.
The plan covers in particular easily used consumables that require neither individual advice nor repair. Which products belong in detail would have to be defined by the Federal Council and the Federal Department of Home Affairs.
Half of the costs is not half the savings
The products envisaged by the Federal Council account for roughly half of the MiGeL cost volume. That volume stood at 727 million francs in 2023. MiGeL is the list of aids and devices, which covers items such as dressings, blood sugar tests and orthoses.
The order of magnitude describes the market concerned, not the savings potential. According to the Federal Council, actual relief also depends on whether insurers and insured persons make use of the new option. Not every insured person will need the same products or find a cheap source within the EEA.
In addition, a maximum reimbursement amount in the MiGeL denotes the maximum cost coverage by basic insurance, not a guaranteed retail price. The FOPH explains that the effective price including value added tax is decisive for billing. A cheaper price and a higher reimbursement cap are therefore two different things.
Care associations criticise scope and liability questions
According to Medinside, Streit expects benefits mainly for private individuals and family carers in border regions. As long as nursing homes and Spitex organisations cannot bill their own foreign purchases accordingly, pressure on Swiss suppliers would remain limited in his view. This is the association representative's assessment, not a market reaction that has already been measured.
Spitex Schweiz set out its rejection in detail as early as its consultation response of 31 March 2025. Among other things, the association calls for comprehensible instructions for use in the national languages and for clarity on responsibility when material procured by patients themselves is used. Care organisations should not be forced to use products whose conformity they cannot assess.
According to that statement, possible double orders add to this: one by the patient, one by Spitex. More complex billing and missing information about Swiss reimbursement limits could also erode price advantages. These points are objections to the proposed design; they do not show that foreign products are generally unsafe.
According to the current Medinside report, Prio.Swiss, by contrast, considers the opening a pragmatic step, especially for easily used consumables. The dispute therefore does not run only along the cheap-versus-expensive line. It also concerns how products are delimited and the effort required for their safe use and billing.
The committee also calls for broader cost control
The National Council committee is not stopping at purchases abroad. It has unanimously submitted a motion for regular reviews of the maximum reimbursement amounts and for an examination of particularly cost-relevant products. A comparison of foreign reimbursement systems has also been commissioned.
This initiative, too, is not yet law. For the bill on EEA purchases, the next announced step is first additional calculations by the administration, followed by further deliberations in the first quarter of 2027.
Sources
- SGK-N: status of deliberations on bill 26.060 and additional savings mandate, 30 October 2026
- Federal Council: proposal on reimbursement of medical devices bought privately in the EEA, 24 June 2026
- FOPH: MiGeL and the meaning of the maximum reimbursement amounts
- Spitex Schweiz: consultation response of 31 March 2025
- Medinside: current statements from Senesuisse, Spitex Schweiz and Prio.Swiss, 4 November 2026
- Lead image: Marius Vassnes, blood glucose test strips, Wikimedia Commons
- Lead image licence: Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0
- Article image: Hadi, Federal Office of Public Health, Wikimedia Commons
- Article image licence: CC0 1.0
