Trump drug tariffs would drive up prices, worsen shortages before any boost to US manufacturing, experts warn
Instead, patient advocates and drug supply chain experts warn, tariffs are likely to drive the price of medicines higher and exacerbate already dangerous drug shortages. Whether they influence manufacturers to make more drugs in the US is a source of debate, and any increase in production is at least several years away.
'We're going to be announcing very shortly a major tariff on pharmaceuticals,' Trump said Tuesday at the National Republican Congressional Committee dinner, although he didn't specify the size of the tariff or when it would be implemented.
Medicines had been exempted from the president's 'Liberation Day' tariff announcement April 2, causing the industry to breathe a brief sigh of relief. The president had also exempted the industry from the tariffs he imposed in his first term.
In his tariffs speech last week, Trump said it was a 'tremendous problem' that 'the United States can no longer produce enough antibiotics to treat our sick.'
That problem may get worse if tariffs come into play, experts warned while agreeing that it's a problem that needs fixing. The impacts of tariffs could be largest for generic drugs, which make up about 90% of the medicines prescribed in the US and many of which rely on ingredients made in China and India.
Generic drugs, whether they're antibiotics, diabetes drugs or statins to lower cholesterol, sell for 'pennies per dose,' said Tom Kraus, vice president of government relations for the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. Increasing the cost of ingredients that go into them 'can make it so that it's no longer profitable to sell that drug in the United States.'
Already, shortages of antibiotics are a major problem in the US. Antimicrobials are among the most common drugs to be in short supply, with 40 active shortages in the US as of the end of 2024, according to data from the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. Antibiotics currently in shortage include amoxicillin, commonly used for strep throat and ear infections, and Bicillin, crucial for treating syphilis infections.
Other especially precarious medicines include sterile injectable drugs used in hospitals. Those can be products as simple as IV saline bags or injectable dextrose, used in emergency settings, as well as cancer chemotherapy drugs. They're required to be manufactured under pristine conditions and have been in shortage for years because of low prices and market disruptions.
'Added costs to already low-margin products may be a tipping point for companies to discontinue production,' said Erin Fox, a drug shortages expert at University of Utah Health. 'I'm worried we'll see discontinuation and a less resilient supply chain if companies quit making essential products.'
An estimated 40% of generic drugs have only one or two suppliers making their ingredients, said Rena Conti, an associate professor at the Boston University Questrom School of Business.
'That's a pretty fragile supply,' Conti said. 'If one of those manufacturers exits, well, then we're a little bit in a pickle' – causing challenges for pharmacies and hospitals in stocking the drugs in the coming months. Consumers, meanwhile, could have trouble finding the medications they need when they go to the drugstore.
And when one manufacturer is the sole supplier of a medicine, prices often rise. That can sometimes be astronomical, even for generic medicines – such as when Martin Shkreli, known as the Pharma Bro, raised the price of a medicine used by people with HIV from $13.50 to $750 overnight. Public and political pressure has made moves like that less common, but they still occur.
But for many generic medicines, especially sterile injectables, it may be difficult for manufacturers to pass along price increases, said Dr. Marta Wosińska, a senior fellow at the Brookings Center on Health Policy.
'One reason is immediate – group purchasing organization (GPO) contracts,' Wosińska wrote in an article analyzing the potential effects of tariffs. 'All hospitals use GPOs to contract for sterile injectable generics used in inpatient settings, with those contracts locking in prices but not quantity.'
Those contracts generally last one to three years, she noted, 'and may limit price increases.'
Moreover, 'there are laws that make increasing prices faster than inflation a problem for a drug company,' said David Maris, a managing partner at Phalanx Investment Partners who spent years as a financial analyst following the drug industry. 'So I am not sure how they would even be able to pass along the increase.'
For branded medicines – those that still have patent protection and don't face cheaper generic copycat competition – it could be a different story, Maris said. There, it would be tariffs from Europe that could hit hardest, with a huge amount of drug manufacturing in countries including Ireland, which has a favorable tax environment.
Ingredients for a branded drug may make up only 10% of the total cost to produce a product, Maris estimated, 'so if that 10% rises by 35%, the overall impact on production costs is relatively small.'
Unlike with generic medicines, makers of branded drugs have more cushion to absorb price increases, Maris pointed out. But he doesn't think they will.
'These costs will be passed on, leading to higher drug prices,' he said. 'For consumers with insurance, that likely means higher premiums and potentially higher out-of-pocket copays.'
Already, the US pays the highest prices for drugs in the world, an imbalance Trump has targeted in the past and one of the few issues that puts him in agreement with lawmakers like Sen. Bernie Sanders.
'Tariffs will exacerbate that problem,' said Merith Basey, executive director of the advocacy group Patients for Affordable Drugs. 'Prescription drugs aren't luxury goods; they're essential to people's health and survival.'
Political and public scrutiny could stop drugmakers from raising prices precipitously, with one Wall Street analyst even begging the industry in a research note to avoid passing tariffs along in the form of higher drug prices for that reason.
Umer Raffat, an analyst with financial firm Evercore ISI, wrote in a March 28 note to clients that he'd heard from multiple CEOs that 'they may have to pass on some of the impact as a price increase.'
'There is already a price discrepancy on many drugs between US vs Europe,' Raffat wrote. 'Raising prices in US will add more fire to this burning issue,' potentially backfiring 'in a big way' by accelerating conversations in Washington about bringing back a plan from Trump's first administration to tie US prices to those paid in other similar countries, known as the 'most favored nation' policy.
And even as drug shortages may worsen and prices increase in the nearer term, experts are skeptical that tariffs would achieve their main stated goal of bringing drug manufacturing back to the US.
'Global supply chains are complex, with pharma among the most,' Evan Seigerman, a pharmaceuticals analyst with financial firm BMO Capital Markets, wrote in a research note. 'It's not as simple as moving where someone screws in little screws to make an iPhone.'
Seigerman predicted that most large pharmaceutical companies 'are likely to look at imposed tariffs with the intention of 'running out the clock,' waiting until the end of Trump's presidency to consider more permanent manufacturing decisions.'
Still, some major US pharmaceutical companies have made large investments in domestic manufacturing recently. Eli Lilly said in February that it would invest an additional $27 billion to build four manufacturing plants in the US, with the potential for tariffs in mind. The company said it anticipates that the plants could start making medicines within five years.
'We're trying to do this quickly, because I think there will be constraints in everything from supply chain of building materials to energy,' Lilly's CEO, David Ricks, told CNN at the time. Ricks also said the plan to build so many new domestic plants relies on renewal of certain favorable tax provisions for the industry.
Still, the process of building new plants or establishing new manufacturing sites can take years. And while multiple experts told CNN they agree it's crucial to reduce the nation's reliance on other countries for critical medicines, they questioned whether tariffs are the way to accomplish that.
'We think that's a critical thing for us to explore with the administration over the next several years,' said John Murphy, CEO of the Association for Accessible Medicines, which represents generic drug manufacturers. 'That's a long-term proposal, right? We can't build that infrastructure overnight, but we can lose access to a number of drugs overnight, if we're not careful.'
Hashtags

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


Chicago Tribune
a few seconds ago
- Chicago Tribune
President Donald Trump orders US nuclear subs repositioned over statements from ex-Russian leader Medvedev
WASHINGTON — In a warning to Russia, President Donald Trump said Friday he's ordering the repositioning of two U.S. nuclear submarines 'based on the highly provocative statements' of the country's former president, Dmitry Medvedev, who has raised the prospect of war online. Trump posted on his social media site that, based on the 'highly provocative statements' from Medvedev, he had 'ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that.' The president added, 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances.' It wasn't clear what impact Trump's order would have on U.S. nuclear subs, which are routinely on patrol in the world's hotspots, but it comes at a delicate moment in the Trump administration's relations with Moscow. Trump has said that special envoy Steve Witkoff is heading to Russia to push Moscow to agree to a ceasefire in its war with Ukraine and has threatened new economic sanctions if progress is not made. He cut his 50-day deadline for action to 10 days, with that window set to expire next week. The post about the sub repositioning came after Trump, in the wee hours of Thursday morning, had posted that Medvedev was a 'failed former President of Russia' and warned him to 'watch his words.' Medvedev responded hours later by writing, 'Russia is right on everything and will continue to go its own way.' And that back-and-forth started earlier this week when Medvedev wrote, 'Trump's playing the ultimatum game with Russia: 50 days or 10' and added, 'He should remember 2 things: 1. Russia isn't Israel or even Iran. 2. Each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war. Not between Russia and Ukraine, but with his own country.' Asked as he was leaving the White House on Friday evening for a weekend at his estate in New Jersey about where he was repositioning the subs, Trump didn't offer any specifics. 'We had to do that. We just have to be careful,' he said. 'A threat was made, and we didn't think it was appropriate, so I have to be very careful.' Trump also said, 'I do that on the basis of safety for our people' and 'we're gonna protect our people.' He later added of Medvedev, 'He was talking about nuclear.' 'When you talk about nuclear, we have to be prepared,' Trump said. 'And we're totally prepared.' Medvedev was Russia's president from 2008 to 2012, while Vladimir Putin was barred from seeking a third consecutive term, and then stepped aside to let him run again. Now deputy chairman of Russia's National Security Council, which Putin chairs, Medvedev has been known for his provocative and inflammatory statements since the start of the war in 2022. That's a U-turn from his presidency, when he was seen as liberal and progressive. Medvedev has frequently wielded nuclear threats and lobbed insults at Western leaders on social media. Some observers have argued that with his extravagant rhetoric, Medvedev is seeking to score political points with Putin and Russian military hawks. One such example before the latest spat with Trump came on July 15, after Trump announced plans to supply Ukraine with more weapons via its NATO allies and threatened additional tariffs against Moscow. Medvedev posted then, 'Trump issued a theatrical ultimatum to the Kremlin. The world shuddered, expecting the consequences. Belligerent Europe was disappointed. Russia didn't care.'


The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Kevin O'Leary on Trump's BLS firing: ‘Don't shoot the messenger'
'Shark Tank' investor Kevin O'Leary on Friday criticized President Trump for proposing the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) head be fired after reporting a decline in job growth. Hours before his comments, Trump slammed Commissioner Erika McEntarfer in a Truth Social post alleging she altered job reports to favor former Vice President Harris during the November election and said he'd given his team orders to dismiss the Biden appointee 'IMMEDIATELY.' Her departure comes three years ahead of schedule. 'We had a bad print on jobs. I did not agree on whacking the commissioner. I don't like that,' O'Leary said during a Friday appearance on CNN. 'Whacking statisticians makes no sense whatsoever. You don't shoot the messenger,' he added. O'Leary has been relatively supportive of Trump's policies, including his unprecedented global trade negotiations in recent days. However, he said there's some uncertainty surrounding markets due to outstanding deals with major U.S. partners. 'I think the market is a little concerned about major trading partners not getting deals yet. It's not a good idea to have 35 percent tariffs on Canada. We know that that's coming into place at midnight right now unless something magic happens,' O'Leary told anchor Kasie Hunt. 'So with this volatility, it's more about future earnings. But a lot of this stuff, including the trade print or the job print noise, just noise. You don't make decisions based on one print,' he added. Friday's job report touted the creation of 73,000 jobs but also lowered previously reported numbers from job growth in May and June by 200,000 citing a substantially reduced statistic than originally published. Trump slammed McEntarfer for the errors. 'Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate, they can't be manipulated for political purposes. McEntarfer said there were only 73,000 Jobs added (a shock!) but, more importantly, that a major mistake was made by them, 258,000 Jobs downward, in the prior two months,' the president wrote. 'Similar things happened in the first part of the year, always to the negative. The Economy is BOOMING under 'TRUMP'…' he added. However, onlookers critiqued the president for slamming the BLS commissioner for the shortcomings. 'President Trump is once again destroying the credibility of our government by firing expert and nonpartisan officials because he does not like the facts that they present,' said Max Stier, the CEO of the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service told NBC News. 'Governments that go down this path find themselves in ugly territory very quickly.'

2 minutes ago
Trump's long history of bashing jobs report numbers dates back to 2016: Analysis
President Donald Trump's history of criticizing the Bureau of Labor Statistics' jobs report has surfaced in the wake of his decision to fire commissioner Erika McEntarfer on Friday. Trump's public frustrations with the economics and statistics agency appear to date back to his 2016 presidential campaign. "Don't believe those phony numbers," then-candidate Trump said in his New Hampshire victory speech during his first campaign for the White House. Last August, Trump claimed without evidence that former President Joe Biden's administration was "caught fraudulently manipulating" job statistics, when the agency publicly disclosed that the economy created fewer than 818,000 jobs between April of 2023 and March of 2024 than initial estimates suggested. "There's never been any revision like this," Trump said at a campaign rally in North Carolina on Aug. 21, 2024. "They wanted it to come out after the election, but somehow it got leaked," he claimed at the time. Trump did not provide evidence that the information publicly disclosed by the agency was leaked. Then-Labor Secretary Julie Su in November 2024 defended the figures, and also suggested the numbers were impacted by Hurricane Helene's impact on the southeastern United States, and labor strikes. "The labor market remains very strong, and this shows what happens when you have a president and a vice president who are fighting for workers every single day," Su said at the time. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) uses several surveys for estimating employment levels in the U.S. and revisions are common. Every monthly Jobs Report has a blurb at the end that updates the figures from the previous two months based on new data. The revision that Trump was referencing was made public on Aug. 21, and updated with final figures in February 2025, according to the BLS website. The same downward revisions also took place during Trump's first term, under then-BLS commissioner William W. Beach. The agency determined 518,000 fewer jobs were created in March 2019 than it had initially reported. Alternatively, Trump had no complaints about the jobs report produced under McEntarfer -- a Biden appointee -- right before the 2024 election, which showed the U.S. gained 12,000 jobs in October. The then-candidate referenced the low numbers while criticizing the Biden-Harris administration at a rally in Milwaukee. "They did 12,000 jobs," Trump said to boos at the rally on Nov. 1. "It's hundreds of thousands of jobs less than it should be," he added. Trump was also quick to embrace the jobs reports as president -- when they were favorable. In March 2017 -- when the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that the economy added 235,000 jobs the prior month -- then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Trump had full faith in the positive report, despite calling it "phony" in the past. "I talked to the president prior to this and he said to quote him very clearly: 'They may have been phony in the past, but it's very real now,'" Spicer said to reporters at the time. Trump's decision to fire McEntarfer on Friday came after the report found the U.S. had added 73,000 jobs in July, according to data from the BLS. The figure marked a slowdown from 147,000 jobs added in the previous month. The unemployment rate ticked up to 4.2%, keeping it at near-historic lows, according to the report. The report provided new estimates for two previous months, significantly dropping the government's estimate of jobs added in May and June. The fresh data indicated a notable slowdown in hiring as Trump's tariffs took hold over recent months. Trump criticized McEntarfer over the revisions, saying without evidence that the revisions suggested jobs statistics had been "manipulated." ABC News has reached out to McEntarfer for a comment. The Trump administration described the downward revisions as an unwelcome sign for the U.S. economy but did not dispute the data. "Obviously, they're not what we want to see," Stephen Miran, chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said on Friday morning. Asked by reporters as he departed the White House on Friday about the reason for McEntarfer's firing, Trump said he believes the economy is doing well and claimed the latest jobs numbers were "phony." "I believe the numbers were phony just like they were before the election, and there were other times," Trump said, pointing to a previous revision in the jobs numbers last year that he claimed, without evidence, was an attempt to benefit Democrats heading into the election. He said this despite using the numbers as a talking point in his campaign.