VA’s Rule on Medication Reducing Disability Ratings: Formally Rescinded
On Tuesday, February 17, 2026, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) published an interim final rule amending 38 CFR § 4.10, the regulation that governs how VA evaluates functional impairment for disability compensation. Countering more than a decade of case law, the new rule would have significantly reduced VA ratings when medication or treatment reduces symptoms.
“VA just rewrote the rules on medication and disability ratings,” says Bradley Hennings, partner at Chisholm Chisholm & Kilpatrick and former Veterans Law Judge at VA.
According to the Federal Register notice, the rule took immediate effect.
In this article, CCK Law explains what would have changed, why VA said it was making this change, what the significance is of an interim final rule, and what veterans and advocates should have considered, if the rule had stayed in effect.
Watch CCK Law Partner Maura Black explain VA’s major rule change and how it would have affected veterans’ claims if it had not been rescinded:
What Would the New Rule Have Done?
VA intended to add two sentences to 38 CFR § 4.10. The new language stated, in substance:
- VA examiners will not estimate or discount improvements to a disability due to medication or treatment, and
- If medication lowers the level of disability, the disability rating will be based on that lowered level.
In plain English: If medication improves a veteran’s symptoms, VA will rate them based on how they function with the medication, not how they would function without it.
That would have been a significant shift from how courts have interpreted the law over the past 13 years.
The Background: The “Jones Line” of Cases
To understand why this rule matters, it helps to understand the court decisions VA is responding to.
Jones v. Shinseki (2012)
In Jones v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 56 (2012), the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) held that the Board of Veterans’ Appeals commits legal error when it considers the “ameliorative effects” of medication unless the applicable diagnostic code specifically allows that consideration.
In plain terms: Unless the rating criteria specifically mentioned medication, VA generally could not reduce a rating solely because medication improved symptoms.
McCarroll v. McDonald (2016)
In McCarroll v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 267 (2016), the Court refined the analysis and discussed whether VA could “discount” the effects of medication.
The case highlighted how difficult it can be for examiners to determine what a disability would look like without treatment.
Ingram v. Collins (2025)
More recently, and apparently most disturbing to VA, was Ingram v. Collins, 38 Vet. App. 130 (2025). In Ingram, the Court extended the reasoning of Jones to musculoskeletal conditions, and in the course of its rule, required examiners to attempt to determine “baseline severity” without medication.
According to VA’s explanation of its new rule, Ingram could require re-adjudication of more than 350,000 pending claims across approximately 500 diagnostic codes. VA argued that this would be a massive and unwarranted administrative burden.
VA’s appeal of this case was dismissed on March 30, 2026, leaving the Ingram decision standing.
What Is Unusual About How VA Tried To Implement This Rule?
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs classified this rule as an economically significant “major rule” under the Congressional Review Act (5 USC § 804(2)), due to an estimated annual impact exceeding $100 million. Ordinarily, a major rule must be submitted to Congress and the Government Accountability Office and cannot take effect until at least 60 days after submission to Congress, per 5 USC § 801(a)(3).
But VA claimed that good cause exists under the provisions of 5 USC 808(2) to forgo the 60-day delayed effective date and publish this as an interim final rule, meaning:
- It would take effect immediately.
- VA did not provide advance notice and comment before implementation.
- A public comment period would follow publication.
The use of an interim final rule may have become an issue in future litigation. If this new rule merely clarified existing practice, the economic impact should have been limited. If it had a nine-figure annual impact, that would suggest a substantive policy shift.
What Would the New Rule Have Meant for Pending and Future Claims?
If you are a veteran or advocate pursuing VA disability benefits, here are three practical implications if this rule had not been rescinded:
1. Baseline Severity Arguments May Have Been Limited Going Forward
For claims decided on or after February 17, 2026, you may have no longer been able to argue that VA must rate you based on your symptoms without medication, under 38 CFR § 4.10 as amended.
For pending claims, the effective date of the rule would have mattered. If your case involves arguments under Jones or Ingram, timing may have been critical.
2. The Ingram Appeal Was Dismissed, Leaving Ingram Standing
Ingram was reportedly on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. It was dismissed on March 30, 2026. This rule would not have automatically rendered that appeal moot, but it would have changed the regulatory landscape.
3. The Public Comment Period Would Matter
Because this was an interim final rule, VA was required to accept and review public comments. Submitting comments would have created an administrative record that could have become important if the rule was challenged in court.
Veterans, advocates, and organizations should have considered whether they wished to weigh in during the comment period.
CCK Law’s Perspective as a Veterans Law Firm
Should Compensation Reflect the Underlying Severity or the Actual Impairment?
There is a legitimate debate here.
On one hand, asking examiners to estimate how severe a condition would be without medication can be speculative, which can lead to inconsistent results, administrative delays, and frustration for veterans. Courts have acknowledged that difficulty.
On the other hand, a rule that automatically rates veterans based on medicated functioning may undercompensate those who depend on continuous treatment to maintain that level of functioning.
For example:
- A veteran whose migraines are controlled only by powerful medication may appear less impaired during examination.
- A veteran whose orthopedic pain is masked by medication may still have functional loss if treatment stops.
The central question becomes: Should compensation reflect how a disability presents with treatment, or the underlying severity of the service-connected condition?
This rule proposed that that question be decided in favor of rating based on treated functioning. Many veterans and advocates have legitimate reasons to disagree.
Should VA Be Able To Implement Its Rule This Way?
VA unquestionably has regulatory authority to amend its own regulations. Courts have acknowledged that authority. However, when an agency implements an economically significant rule with immediate effect, without prior notice and comment, the situation deserves careful scrutiny.
Frequently Asked Questions
Would this new rule have affected all diagnostic codes?
The amendment was to 38 CFR § 4.10, which governs functional impairment broadly. That means the impact could have extended across many conditions, not just one body system.
Would VA have reduced my current rating?
Not automatically. However, the rule could have affected how VA evaluates claims for increased ratings, initial ratings, or future examinations.
Was the rule final?
It was an interim final rule that became effective February 17, 2026. It was formally rescinded effective Feb. 27, 2026, and the prior regulatory text was restored.
Final Thoughts
Regulatory changes like this, when they remain in effect, can reshape how VA evaluates disability claims for years to come. While some viewed this amendment as a clarification, others saw it as a substantive change that would have altered longstanding judicial protections.
UPDATE (February 19, 2026): VA Announces It Will Not Enforce Rule About Medication
On Feb. 19, 2026, VA announced that it will stop enforcing an interim final rule called “Evaluative Rating: Impact of Medication.”
Within hours of the rule’s publication, major veterans service organizations voiced strong opposition. They felt that veterans might be penalized for following prescribed treatment plans, and no veteran should have to worry that taking medication to manage a service-connected condition could jeopardize compensation. The public response was immediate and substantial. Thousands of comments were submitted at regulations.gov in a matter of days.
Shortly thereafter, VA leadership announced via social media that enforcement would stop. The department stated that although it did not agree with how the rule had been characterized, it recognized the level of concern and would not move forward with applying it. “VA will continue to collect public comments regarding the rule, but it will not be enforced at any time in the future,” said Doug Collins, Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
Three takeaways for veterans that still apply, even with the formal rescission of this rule:
- If you are pursuing a claim or appeal, the longstanding legal framework still applies. Unless a specific diagnostic code explicitly factors in medication, VA should evaluate the underlying severity of your condition, consistent with controlling case law.
- Stay informed. Regulatory developments can move quickly, and they can directly affect your rights. Reviewing official sources such as the Code of Federal Regulations, decisions from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and credible veterans law resources can help you understand what changes mean in real terms.
- Remember that benefits are not a handout. They are compensation for disabilities incurred or aggravated in service. Congress created this system to recognize the real-world impact of those conditions on work and daily life. When potential policy changes raise concerns, it is appropriate for veterans and advocates to speak up. Constructive public engagement is part of how the system improves.
If you have questions about how disability ratings are calculated, how medication factors into your specific diagnostic code, or whether you may be entitled to a higher evaluation, there are educational resources available here at cck-law.com and on our YouTube channel to help you understand your options.
