If you’re a physician or practice owner, you’ve probably heard the rumblings. Medicare is planning a major overhaul of its Physician Fee Schedule for 2026. This isn’t just another round of minor tweaks. We’re talking about a fundamental change in how doctors are paid, how procedures are valued, and who gets to decide what your work is worth. As someone who’s spent years navigating the maze of healthcare reimbursement, I can tell you—this is the kind of policy shift that can be scary.
But is it all doom and gloom? Or could there be a silver lining for some specialties?
Let’s break down what’s really at stake, what you can do to prepare, and why this matters for every physician’s bottom line.
• Most side gigs take time to build. This one pays fast.
• I do short, physician-only surveys on Sermo between cases and get paid for my input.
• They take just a few minutes and the money hits PayPal or gift cards right away.
• It’s not replacing my OR income, but it covers the little things that have a big impact—gifts, kids' activities, or the next date night.
A New Era for Physician Compensation
For decades, the value of your work as a doctor—whether you’re a surgeon, a pediatrician, or a primary care physician—has been determined by a committee within the American Medical Association (AMA). This committee meets infrequently, sometimes only once per decade, to decide how much each procedure, visit, or service is “worth.” Their decisions don’t just affect Medicare; private insurers often follow their lead.

But under the proposed 2026 changes, that power is shifting. Instead of the AMA committee, Medicare itself will take the reins. A new internal committee would be created to set these values, representing a huge policy shift. And it’s not just about who’s in charge—it’s about how the entire system of valuing medical work could be rewritten.
Why This Matters: Winners, Losers, and the Primary Care Question
One of the biggest criticisms of the current system is that it tends to favor high-procedure specialties—think surgeons—while undervaluing primary care, pediatrics, and other fields focused on prevention and long-term health. There obviously is a big role for prevention of disease and maintaining the health of the world and of our country. Yet, the way things are set up now, those specialties often get the short end of the stick.
So, could this shakeup finally mean better pay for primary care docs?
Maybe.
This could potentially result in an increase in value, compensation, and reimbursement for primary care physicians, and some of the traditionally undervalued specialties. If the new Medicare committee recognizes the true value of prevention and ongoing care, we might see a long-overdue rebalancing.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
There’s no guarantee that the new system will get it right. In fact, there’s a real risk that things could backfire.
Potential Pitfalls: Efficiency Cuts and the Risk of Burnout
One of the proposals on the table is to cut reimbursement for all procedures, based on the argument that they’ve become more efficient over time. The logic goes: if a surgery takes less time or uses better technology, it should be reimbursed less.
But that efficiency comes with increased responsibility and risk that the physician takes on. So, should that necessarily receive less reimbursement? I don’t agree with that.
The danger is that these across-the-board cuts could penalize doctors who have worked hard to improve their practice, while ignoring the real-world complexity and risk that comes with patient care.
And let’s be honest: physician compensation is often blamed for rising healthcare costs, even though the data tells a different story. Physician reimbursement has actually increased, especially over the past few years, at a rate much lower than inflation. Meanwhile, costs driven by insurance companies, administrators, and regulators have skyrocketed.
If the new system leads to lower pay across the board, the consequences could be severe:
- Increased physician shortages, especially in primary care
- Higher rates of burnout and moral injury
- More doctors leaving the profession or cutting back on hours
If you add decreasing compensation onto that, the physician shortage could increase dramatically and you could see rates of burnout and moral injury within the physician community rise drastically.
The Government Factor: Will Medicare Get It Right?
There’s another big question hanging over all of this: can a government-run committee really do a better job than the AMA?
I’ll be honest—it's possible, but I'm wary. There’s some discord or disconnect between the current administration’s policymakers with healthcare and what physicians think are the best policies to put forward.
Either way, any situation in which doctors’ voices could be drowned out by bureaucrats who don’t understand the realities of patient care is not a good one for doctors, patients, or the healthcare system.
If physician input goes away, we could end up with a system that’s even less responsive to the needs of doctors and patients. That’s a recipe for frustration, inefficiency, and—ultimately—worse care.
Action Steps: How Doctors Can Prepare Now
So, what can you do to protect yourself and your practice as these changes loom? Here’s my advice, drawn from both personal experience and conversations with colleagues:
1. Optimize Your Practice Operations
- Review your scheduling: Are you maximizing your available slots? Are cancellations eating into your revenue?
- Streamline patient screening: Make sure you’re not losing time or money on preventable no-shows or poorly prepared patients.
- Delegate effectively: Use your team to the fullest, so you can focus on high-value activities.
2. Take Control of Your Personal Finances
- Know your net worth: Track your assets and liabilities so you have a clear picture of your financial health.
- Create a budget: Make sure you’re spending less than you earn, and build a margin you can invest for the future. (My budgeting template is right here!)
- Avoid lifestyle inflation: The best advice I could give young doctors is to manage their expenses. Don’t let a higher income lead to higher spending.
3. Plan for Financial Freedom
- Set a target: Know when you want to reach financial independence, so you’re not reliant on every paycheck.
- Invest wisely: Use your savings margin to build a nest egg that can weather changes in reimbursement.
- Prepare for uncertainty: The more financially secure you are, the more freedom you have to practice medicine on your own terms.
4. Advocate for Physician Input
- Get involved: Join professional organizations, attend meetings, and make your voice heard.
- Stay informed: Follow updates on the Medicare fee schedule and be ready to provide feedback during public comment periods.
- Support your colleagues: Share information and strategies so the physician community can respond collectively.
Conclusion: Don’t Wait for the System to Decide Your Future
The 2026 Medicare fee schedule shakeup is likely coming, whether we like it or not. It could mean long-overdue recognition for primary care and undervalued specialties—or it could bring new headaches, lower pay, and more burnout. The only thing that’s certain is that change is on the horizon.
As doctors, we can’t control every policy decision. But we can control how we prepare, how we manage our practices and finances, and how we support each other through uncertain times.
If you’re a physician or practice owner, now is the time to take a hard look at your operations, your financial plan, and your advocacy efforts. Don’t wait for the system to decide your future—take action today.
Here are some additional resources to help:
- How to Increase Your Compensation Both Clinically and Non-Clinically
- Understanding the RVU Compensation Model for Physicians
- I Designed a DIY Financial Literacy Curriculum for Physicians
- Physician Pay Decline: The Simple Solution Most Doctors Are Overlooking
What do you think? Are these potential changes to the Medicare fee schedule good or bad? Why or why not? Will it help specialties like primary care? Let me know in the comments below!

12 Responses
Rehash of the pay scheme was supposed to happen 35 years ago with RVS but never really happened and doctors game the system, whatever the new scheme. It’s the nature of things. You change the rules of the game and players of the game adjust and move in a different direction. It’s always in flux and a 1 time change will soon become outdated and you have to adjust periodically and that needs to be built into any system you decide on.
Some basic rules generally rise up.
Salary payment often leads to decreased productivity.
Capitation payment leads to quality issues as people cut corners.
Fee for service leads to overuse of services.
You need a national health plan that encompasses Doctors, Hospitals, Insurance plans, pharmaceuticals, DME.
Your best bet is to be conservative in your life style, some frugality, guard against over extension and redirect yourself back to your love for the profession. I went through multiple payment schedules and formulas over the years and did well in all of them. Just did my work the best I could, enjoyed my patients and colleagues and when I had run my course I retired at 68 and went on with the rest of my life.
This is a really well thought out response, I appreciate it! You are right, the systems level can never quite be trusted to be perfect and the best bet is to create a plan on the individual level that will allow you to reach your financial goals and live your life (and practice medicine which is still an amazing profession) on your own terms!
When all physicians get paid the same for the same work, then things will improve.
Under the current scheme: a pediatrician, an urgent care doctor, and an ENT will all get paid differently for seeing a 12yo in clinic for an earache. This occurs even if they all do the exact same work-up, provide the exact same medication, and spend the exact same amount of time with the patient. In this example, the pediatrician might get $30, the urgent care $90, and the ENT $150.
This is fundamentally unfair.
I think that’s a very fair point. Is this an issue with billing, are you all reporting the same CPTs/ICDs?
This is absolutely wrong. Everybody within the same geographic area gets the same reimbursement per CPT code submitted. I’d suggest you learn something about coding and reimbursement before posting grossly incorrect information.
I’m betting there is an opportunity for education here!
Of course it is, and it happens because surgeons have disproportionate influence/votes on the AMA committee. They were better organized, and had more resources to lobby, and fewer inhibitions to be focused on “money”. If the new Medicare guided RVUs address this , ie pay all three $90 we all-except the ENT-be better served. I don’t see primary care docs being all that concerned about these changes. Proceduralists know they have been favored and this is mostly whining. NB to his plastic surgeon author- the medicare global budget is going to be whatever the politicians determine. The ONLY question is how that budget is allocated. Any change will disproportionately impact proceduralists as it should.
I think there is likely some nuance here that is missed. Certainly all specialties should be well represented and organized. Certain procedures are more complex and require more time and thus compensation. Same goes with non procedural interventions. This kind of splitting is likely what hurt us all in the first place.
I was a private practice ENT for 9 years. Rarely do I respond to comments like this but it drives me crazy when primary care docs say things like this out of complete ignorance. I have heard things like this many times. In my experience in private practice most of the time I would get paid less for that visit you are describing than a health system would get paid if they were employing a pediatrician or PA in an urgent care. I am not saying that the provider pay is not different if a large system siphons off profit. So that is floridly incorrect. Another misconception is that you inherently get paid more for surgery than seeing patients in the office. There is rarely a day when I am in the operating room that I make more than a busy day in the office. The risk associated with operating is much more as well. When I left private practice I calculated my profit on surgeries for a year being a very busy and fast surgeon. When I factored in my overhead of a surgery scheduler and global periods for 60% of my cases (tubes, tonsils, thyroglossal duct cysts, laryngeal biopsies, etc.) my take home profit was $0 (pure community service). At least in an employed setting I get paid something. Comments like this make physicians look extremely ignorant and like we just complain all the time. I would have family practice residents work with me regularly and I would be very transparent about reimbursement and it was eye opening for them. I will acknowledge though that at least for a specialty like ENT you can make more per visit on the specific visits which bill an E&M and CPT or if you only address 2 problems vs 6 like a PCP might. Those are the only 2 specific reasons an ENT would make more money in private practice than a PCP (negotiated reimbursement rates aside). I have been in a hospital employed RVU model for the past year and yes surgical specialists will get paid more per RVU but this is purely based on that they figure you will bring surgical cases with significant facility fees to the system and they share a very small percentage of that downstream revenue with you.
Thanks for your comments. I’m biased as a proceduralist but I think you do a fantastic job of highlighting the increased associated risk in the OR. Like anything, more risk = more reward. But I appreciate you also shedding light on the billing discrepancies. My guess is that this is a major factor for reimbursement issues among different practices.
The doc and his patient should decide on what the medical care is worth. Figure out a way to get rid of third-party payment except for those who need it. Could be DPC or direct payment or some hybrid variant. Fee for service is not the culprit – it’s the efficient and cost effective way we pay for everything else.
I think DPC will completely change the game! Just seems to be tricky figuring out how to integrate it with subspecialties that are procedure based