The CMA's reforms to the veterinary sector have been broadly welcomed, and with good reason. Price lists, prescription fee caps, ownership transparency, written estimates for larger treatments and itemised bills are all basic transparency measures that have been missing from the market for a long time.
But if lower pet insurance premiums are the hoped-for result, most people who analyse these things for a living are cautious. The reforms may make the veterinary market clearer, but that is not the same as making veterinary care cheaper.
What the reforms actually change
To recap briefly, the CMA's final report published in March 2026 confirmed a package of legally binding measures for vet practices. The headline changes are prescription fees capped at £21 for the first medication and £12.50 for additional medicines on the same prescription, down from the £30 or more many practices currently charge.
Price lists must be published online. Practices must disclose whether they are independent or part of a corporate chain. Written estimates are required for treatment expected to cost over £500. Itemised bills must be provided after treatment.
Most of these changes are expected to start coming into force for larger practices before the end of 2026, with the full rollout continuing through 2027.
Why this probably won't reduce premiums
Insurance premiums are driven primarily by claims costs. When vet bills go up, claims cost more, and premiums follow. For the reforms to reduce premiums, they would need to reduce the underlying cost of veterinary care in a meaningful way. Many analysts think the chances of that are limited, at least in the near term.
Defaqto, the financial intelligence firm, put it plainly in its analysis of the reforms. Greater transparency and prescription fee caps may help reduce certain day-to-day treatment costs, but the reforms are unlikely to materially reduce the overall cost of veterinary care. In many cases, the changes may redistribute costs rather than remove them.
The prescription fee cap is the clearest example. Capping the fee for issuing a written prescription at £21 is useful for pet owners who then buy medication online for less. But the cap does not affect the cost of consultations, surgery, diagnostics, hospitalisation or any of the other things that make up the bulk of insurance claims.
The CMA found that 70% of pet owners buying long-term medication are currently doing so through their vet, and many could save around £200 a year by using a written prescription elsewhere. That is a real saving for those individuals, but it does not change the cost structure of the wider veterinary market in any fundamental way.
"The reforms are unlikely to materially reduce the overall cost of veterinary care. In many cases, the changes may simply redistribute costs rather than remove them."
The consolidation problem hasn't gone away
One of the core issues the CMA identified was the consolidation of the UK veterinary sector under a small number of large corporate groups. Six groups now own around 60% of all practices, and the CMA found that this concentration was weakening competition and contributing to above-inflation price rises.
The transparency reforms address the symptoms of that problem by making ownership and pricing easier to see, but they do not directly address the underlying structure. Some analysts are concerned that further consolidation could continue after the reforms, particularly if smaller independent practices struggle with the compliance costs and administrative burden of the new requirements.
Fewer independent practices over time would mean less local competition, which is the opposite of what the reforms are trying to achieve on pricing.
What might actually happen to premiums
Some analysts think the reforms could push premiums up in the short term rather than down. The reason is data. With practices required to publish price lists and share pricing information, insurers will have access to far more granular data about what treatments actually cost across the market.
That may allow insurers to price risk more accurately, which is useful for the industry, but more accurate pricing based on real cost data is not the same thing as cheaper pricing.
Defaqto's view is that the long-term impact of the CMA's reforms is more likely to be a shift towards more sophisticated data-driven pricing strategies than a meaningful reduction in the cost of cover.
What it does mean for pet owners
Setting premiums aside, the reforms are still useful for anyone dealing with vet costs. Knowing whether a practice is part of a chain, being able to compare prices between local practices, getting a written estimate before a big treatment and having the prescription fee capped all create practical information that was not consistently available before.
The CEO of pet insurer Waggel described the current system as not working for anyone. Vets were criticised for unexpected fees, pricing varied widely, insurers found it harder to price products fairly, and consumers were left dealing with surprise costs and higher premiums. The reforms will not fix all of that overnight, but they create a more transparent starting point than the one that existed before.
For pet owners with insurance, the guide to understanding your vet fee limit gives more context on why policy limits matter when the underlying cost of treatment is not falling quickly.
This article is for general information only and does not constitute advice of any kind.