The Republican plan to replace the Affordable Care Act was released early last week, and it has already marched through consideration in two important committees. Yet members of Congress debated the policy details without essential information: The bill had not yet been “scored” by the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan group of budget analysts and economists whose job is to forecast the bill’s consequences over the next decade or so.

That score is expected this week, and its estimates could make or break the Republicans’ plan. (The White House has pre-emptively cast doubt on the C.B.O. report.)

We asked experts from both parties – health economists, consultants and people who led the C.B.O. – to provide some plausible estimates for the report’s most important questions. Their answers provide a useful background for understanding the bounds of the possible in the report and why there’s so much uncertainty around its estimates. We’re displaying each expert’s high and low estimate separately.

What will the long-term cost be?

Estimated 10-year impact on the federal deficit

Republicans are passing their health reform package through a special budget process called reconciliation. For the bill to qualify, the C.B.O. will need to say that the bill would save the federal budget at least $2 billion over 10 years. That is a relatively small amount in federal budget terms, but most of our panelists thought there was at least a chance the plan would fall short. If it does, Republicans will need to make changes before the bill can proceed.

More broadly, finding some savings in the bill may be important to sell it politically. Republicans have long railed against Obamacare as expensive and unsustainable. But Democrats balanced out the Affordable Care Act’s new spending with new taxes and cuts to Medicare. The Republican plan would spend less on providing health insurance to the poor, but it also eliminates all the Obamacare taxes, reducing the revenue coming into the federal government.

How many people will lose their health insurance?

Increase in the number of uninsured people in 2026, compared with current projections

President Trump has promised that his plan will “cover everybody.” This legislation won’t do that. Forecasts from our experts ranged widely, but all of them thought that the bill would result in more Americans becoming uninsured. House Speaker Paul Ryan has also acknowledged that the Republican bill would cover fewer Americans than Obamacare. But the size of the coverage losses is what matters: Some senators who would be comfortable voting on a bill that causes five million people to lose their insurance might be less comfortable endorsing it if it would lead to losses of 20 million.

An earlier Republican plan, which would have simply repealed Obamacare’s major coverage provisions, was expected to cause 32 million people to lose health insurance by the end of the decade. If the numbers for this bill start looking close to those numbers, some conservatives who prefer the simpler repeal bill may be less enthusiastic about this one.

How much will premiums change?

Change in premium cost of a Silver plan (or its equivalent) for a 40-year-old in 2026, compared with current projections

Premium cost is a major complaint among Republicans, who have argued that Obamacare made insurance too unaffordable to be attractive to many Americans. But several of our experts think the result of the reform bill will be to raise, not lower, insurance premiums. The Republican plan doesn’t change many of the regulations that critics say made Obamacare plans expensive, like its requirements that insurers charge the same prices to healthy and sick people, or its rule that every health plan cover a set of minimum benefits.

Many economists believe that the law’s tax credits will not be generous enough to bring as many poor, healthy people into the market as the Obamacare tax credits did. And it does away with the individual mandate, a provision of the law some experts think encourages healthy customers to sign up. The result could be a smaller pool of people who are sicker and more expensive to insure. The plan does make some changes that would tend to lower insurance prices, which is why some of our experts think prices could be a little lower under the new plan.

How many people will lose Medicaid coverage?

Decrease in number of Medicaid recipients in 2026, compared with current projections

The Republican bill makes two major changes to Medicaid, both of which are likely to depress enrollment in the program. That’s why all of our experts estimate substantial reductions in the number of Americans in the program.

Obamacare allowed states to expand Medicaid to cover more poor adults without children. The bill lets that expansion stand, but would cut the funding the federal government would give states to provide care to that population. The law also reduces the long-term funding the federal government will give states to cover all Medicaid beneficiaries, even those who were in the program before Obamacare. The C.B.O.’s calculations on the effects may depend more on political predictions than the budget analysis, since it will have to estimate how states will respond to these changes.

How will employer-based insurance change?

Change in recipients of employer-sponsored coverage in 2026, compared with current projections

Far more Americans get their insurance from work than buy it directly, and many people with work-based insurance are happy with what they have. That means that any prediction that the policy will lead people to lose their work-based coverage could be unwelcome news for Republicans.

The Republican bill eliminates an Obamacare provision that fines employers that don’t cover their workers. It also offers more generous tax credits to higher earners, who currently tend to get insurance through work. Employers of middle-class workers who would be reluctant to drop coverage and leave workers empty-handed might feel differently under this system. That mix of policies could lead more employers to drop coverage than they would under the current law.