
Trump wants cheaper drugs like Europe has. How it works.
President Donald Trump doesn't just want to bring down prescription drug prices for Americans. He wants European countries to raise them to make up the revenue that drugmakers would lose from his policy.
Trump is proposing a so-called most-favored-nation pricing model, which would set U.S. drug prices at the lowest level in other wealthy countries.
But the pharmaceutical industry isn't buying into tying drug prices in the U.S. to prices in Europe—at least not knowing the details of the president's proposal.
More details about the government's pricing model could come this week. On May 12, Trump directed government health officials to benchmark drug prices to international standards within 30 days.
The lobbying group PhRMA, with members including U.S. pharma giants Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and AbbVie, has argued there are two reasons why U.S. drug prices are high: foreign countries not paying 'their fair share" for medicines, and middlemen such as pharmacy-benefit managers.
Today, U.S. drug pricing is largely market driven. It involves negotiations between drug manufacturers, pharmacy-benefit managers, healthcare insurers and providers.
European countries do it much differently. Each has its own way of determining drug prices, but most follow one of two broad approaches.
The first approach, which Germany and France use, considers the overall clinical effectiveness of a new medicine. How does the new treatment compare to existing ones? Does it have added therapeutic benefits? If the new drug is substantially better, its price would reflect that.
A second approach, used by the U.K., the Netherlands, and Sweden, analyzes cost effectiveness. This model not only compares the new drug to existing ones but also assesses the incremental value that the medicine brings to the health system.
After the assessments, negotiations between drugmakers and the countries begin. Because many European countries have national health systems, they are in a strong negotiation position. If government negotiators think a medicine is too expensive for its effectiveness, they won't recommend its use.
How Trump's MFN policy would work in practice isn't clear. Drug prices would probably be based on list prices in Europe since the prices paid by national health systems, or net prices, are confidential.
The president's open-ended directive, laid out in an executive order, has many wondering how the U.S. could raise prices in Europe. Trump has made clear he wants to close the gap between U.S. and international prices, and has suggested he would use tariffs and export controls to achieve his goal.
In theory, drugmakers could set list prices higher in Europe as long as it doesn't affect net prices, health policy expert Dr. Huseyin Naci told Barron's.
In the U.K., for example, a higher list price could still lower the prices in other European countries.
'So that would still not be an acceptable approach to many other European countries," said Naci, who is associate professor of health policy at the London School of Economics.
Overhauling Europe's decades-old pricing approaches would require fundamental changes to their pricing regulations—and there will be 'little appetite or ability" to alter them, Naci added.
Cost is another complicating factor. 'Pharmaceutical spending is already one of the top categories of spending in many countries in terms of healthcare expenditure, so there's little room to accommodate higher prices and spending for pharmaceuticals in Europe," according to Naci.
How Trump is planning to make Europeans pay more for drugs is the big question. He could use tariffs and trade negotiations as leverage.
In early April, the president said a 'major" tax on pharmaceutical imports is coming 'very shortly," however nothing has been announced yet.
In a trade agreement with the U.K. a month later, there is a provision on pharmaceuticals that states the U.K. will 'endeavor to improve the overall environment for pharmaceutical companies."
What that means in practice still isn't clear.
Write to Elsa Ohlen at elsa.ohlen@barrons.com
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
Israel hits Iran nuclear site, kills its military brass, top scientists
Representative image Iran was reeling on Friday from waves of Israeli strikes that decapitated its military chain of command and targeted a key nuclear facility, as US President Donald Trump urged Iran to strike a deal curbing its nuclear programme or risk "even more brutal" attacks. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu described the assault, which was brought about by deploying warplanes and drones smuggled into the country, as a last resort to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, which Israel views as an existential threat. Israel said the strikes were only the start of 'Operation Rising Lion'. The attacks also killed several top Iranian officials and six nuclear scientists and hit Iran's long-range missile facilities and aerial defences. As evening fell, Iranian media reported explosions on the northern and southern outskirts of Tehran and at Fordo, near the holy city of Qom, a second major nuclear site. Israel's military said it was striking Iranian missile and drone launching sites. Air defences were activated across Tehran and explosions could be heard in Isfahan, with Israel claiming it had struck the nuke site there. Iran said in retaliation "the gates of hell will open". by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed! IC Markets Start Now Undo On Friday night, explosions were heard over Tel Aviv and Jerusalem as sirens sounded across Israel following what the country's military spokesman said was the firing of missiles from Iran. Iran's state news agency IRNA said hundreds of ballistic missiles had been launched, shortly after supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised "harsh punishment". There were no immediate reports of casualties. Friday's strikes were the first time Israel successfully hit Iran's nuke facilities, including its main enrichment facility at Natanz, which an Israeli military spokesperson said had suffered "significant damage."


Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
Tel Aviv Thumps Tehran
Iran is weak. Even then, oil price, trade routes are at risk Israel's stunning strikes on Iran put West Asia back on the edge. These strikes were deep into Iran, hitting nuclear facilities and ballistic missile sites, and heads of its armed forces and IRGC were taken out. Tehran has vowed harsh response, but its options may be constrained today. Israel already battered its Lebanese proxy Hezbollah last year and brought on the downfall of the pro-Tehran Assad regime in Syria. Plus, Israel claims that the latest strikes involved a covert Mossad cell that operated from within Iran to take out Iranian air defence and ballistic missile launchers. This would mean Tehran's counter-intelligence network has failed on multiple fronts. Meanwhile, Trump appears to be threatening more Israeli military action against Iran if Tehran doesn't do a fresh deal with Washington on its nuclear programme. US and Iran have been engaging in talks over the matter. But Washington's position that Tehran abandon its nuclear programme hasn't cut ice with the Iranian regime. But if the strikes were meant to be a harsh message to the Ayatollahs, they may end up having the opposite effect – Tehran could accelerate a nuclear weapons programme and quit NPT. That in turn would increase tensions with the Gulf Arab states, and the Saudis may push their case for a nuclear programme. The impact of all this on energy prices could be acute. Price of crude has already leapt by 9% and could head further north. Supply chains may again take a hit given important sea lanes in the region. Not to forget undersea cables that could be targeted or weaponised. For India too things get complicated. Iran provides our potential alternative trade route to Afghanistan via Chabahar port. The same route links up to International North-South Transport Corridor for Central Asia. But prolonged chaos in the region puts all of this under a cloud. An escalatory military conflict between Tel Aviv and Tehran is not in the world's interest. But Netanyahu, the Ayatollahs and Trump may have other ideas. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.


Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
Tel Aviv vs Tehran
Israel recently carried out strong surprise attacks deep inside Iran, hitting important military and nuclear sites. This has made the already tense West Asia (Middle East) even more unstable. Iran says it will hit back, but it may not have many options right now. Israel has already weakened some of Iran's closest allies, like the Hezbollah group in Lebanon and the government in Syria. Israel also says that its spy agency, Mossad, secretly worked inside Iran to destroy Iran's defences from within. That's a big embarrassment for Iran's own intelligence system. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump is warning Iran to agree to a new deal about its nuclear program — or face more attacks. The US wants Iran to stop trying to build nuclear weapons, but Iran isn't agreeing. In fact, after these attacks, Iran may go faster toward building nuclear weapons and even leave an international peace agreement (called the NPT). If that happens, other countries in the region like Saudi Arabia might also try to build nuclear weapons — which would make the whole region more dangerous. All of this affects the rest of the world too. Oil prices have already gone up by 9%, and may rise more. Shipping and trade through the area could be blocked or delayed. Important undersea internet cables could be damaged. For India, this is also a problem because we use Iran's Chabahar port as a trade route to Afghanistan and Central Asia. If there's too much fighting in the region, that route may be shut down. In short, this fight between Israel (Tel Aviv) and Iran (Tehran) could hurt everyone — but the leaders involved seem ready to take that risk. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.