“We pay for healthcare twice. And we have already come to see this as normal,” Cristina Prună said.
The MP cited the results of an APSAP study, according to which 81. 6% of respondents believe that taxation in Romania is excessive, while 65. 6% say that when they have a health problem, they generally choose private medical services.
The study collected 3,591 responses between March 2025 and August 2026. Among private-sector employees, the share of respondents who say they usually turn to private healthcare rises to 72. 3%, while among public-sector employees it stands at 53.
1%. Cristina Prună argues that these figures point to a structural problem in the current system. “In other words, the state takes money from you every month for healthcare.
Mandatorily. Then you need a medical consultation, a test, or an MRI scan. You do not want to wait for months.
So you go to a private provider. And you pay again. Once through taxes.
A second time with your bank card,” the MP said. What Cristina Prună’s bill actually proposes The proposal backed by Cristina Prună does not mean, in the version submitted to Parliament, that every invoice issued by a private clinic would automatically be paid from Romania’s health insurance contribution, known as CASS. Bill PL-x 186/2024 proposes the creation of a basic private health insurance system and would give insured individuals the option to choose a private insurer.
That insurer could receive, on behalf of the taxpayer, part of the funds currently collected through the National Single Health Insurance Fund. The Chamber of Deputies explicitly describes the purpose of the bill as the “demonopolization” of the National Health Insurance House (CNAS) and as giving individuals the freedom to choose their insurer for the basic healthcare package. In the initial version of the bill, the amount that could be transferred to a private insurer was capped at a maximum of 50% of the health insurance contribution corresponding to one gross minimum wage.
It was therefore not equivalent to half of the CASS amount actually paid by each individual taxpayer. “If I choose to have a medical test or investigation done privately, why can’t at least part of the cost be covered from the contribution I have already paid? Why should CNAS retain a monopoly over our money?
” Cristina Prună asked. The MP argues that such a reform would not mean abandoning either the principle of solidarity or the public healthcare system. “It means giving every Romanian greater freedom to choose what happens to the money they are already paying for healthcare.
It means competition and pressure to provide better services. The money should follow the patient,” she said. Important: private healthcare services can already be reimbursed by CNAS Under the current system, the distinction between “public” and “private” healthcare is not absolute.
Private clinics and hospitals that have contracts with health insurance houses can provide services reimbursed from public funds, within the limits of those contracts and the healthcare packages covered by the system. CNAS publishes lists of both public and private healthcare providers that have contracts with the health insurance houses. Problems arise when certain services are not covered by such contracts or when the allocated funding or the number of reimbursed appointments has been exhausted.
In such cases, patients may end up paying the full cost themselves. CNAS also specifies that some categories of healthcare services are not reimbursed from the National Single Health Insurance Fund. The change proposed by Prună would introduce competition between CNAS and private insurers for the management of part of the mandatory health insurance contributions.
The bill has been in Parliament since 2024 and has received a rejection report The initiative was submitted by 40 lawmakers, most of them from USR, with Cristina Prună listed among the initiators. The Senate rejected the bill on March 11th, 2024, after which it was sent to the Chamber of Deputies, which is the decision-making chamber. However, the bill has encountered institutional opposition.
In May 2024, the Government issued a negative opinion, while the Chamber of Deputies’ Health Committee prepared a report recommending that the bill be rejected. As of August 18th, 2026, the official status of the bill still indicated: “report submitted; to be placed on the agenda. ” Romania’s Financial Supervisory Authority, the ASF, also did not support the bill in its proposed form.
The authority considered that the regulatory framework was insufficiently developed for such a complex field and that, in the version it reviewed, the proposal did not represent “a viable alternative,” although it acknowledged the potential benefits of giving patients greater freedom of choice. Romanians still pay a significant share of healthcare costs out of pocket The debate is resurfacing in a healthcare system where out-of-pocket spending by individuals continues to account for a significant share of healthcare expenditure. An analysis of Romania’s healthcare system published in 2026 by the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies shows that direct household payments accounted for more than one-fifth of total healthcare expenditure, according to the most recent comparable data used in the report.
This is also the political argument Cristina Prună is trying to bring back into focus: taxpayers should have greater freedom than they do today to decide who manages part of the money they are required to contribute toward healthcare.