
Donald Trump Threatens 250% Tariff on Pharmaceuticals
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
President Donald Trump has said that tariffs on pharmaceutical imports could eventually reach up to 250 percent, as his administration works to lower prescription prices for Americans.
During an interview with CNBC on Tuesday, the president said he will initially impose a "small tariff on pharmaceuticals," which will rise to 150 percent "in one year, one and a half years maximum," before then eventually jumping to 250 percent.
Newsweek reached out to the White House via email for comment.
Why It Matters
The United States imports a significant amount of pharmaceuticals each year—over $200 billion in 2024, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity.
Should Trump follow through on ramping up these duties, the highest he has threatened on the industry to date, experts believe this could result in significant increases to drug prices in the U.S. However, some health policy experts told Newsweek this could also help rebalance the global drug supply chain to better favor American customers.
What To Know
Trump said that the tariffs are intended to encourage pharmaceutical companies to move their operations to the U.S.—"because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country"—and to minimize reliance on Europe.
He had previously threatened to place 200 percent tariffs on pharmaceuticals in July, but said he would give the industry time before this change came into effect.
Trump's threats of pharmaceutical tariffs have raised concerns among experts that these could lead to increased costs and medication shortages in the U.S. In April, the UNC Center for the Business of Health published a report warning that these effects would be especially significant for generic drugs, which are more likely to be imported and operate on lower profit margins than brand-name medications.
"A 250 percent tariff on pharmaceuticals would have a significant impact on drug prices," said health economist Jeromie Ballreich.
Ballreich told Newsweek that, for branded pharmaceuticals, higher costs from the tariffs will be "passed on to consumers and most likely will be indirect through higher prescription drug insurance premiums."
Major pharmaceutical companies across the world saw their shares fall on Wednesday following Trump's announcement. England-based AstraZeneca was down by 1.1 percent, Indiana-based Eli Lilly by 2.3 percent, and Germany-based Bayer AG by nearly 10 percent as of 11:20 ET.
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters near Air Force One at Lehigh Valley International Airport on August 3, 2025.
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters near Air Force One at Lehigh Valley International Airport on August 3, 2025.The latest threat comes as the industry braces for the outcome of an ongoing probe by the Commerce Department into the national security implications of America's medicinal imports. The investigation was launched in April by Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick under Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act.
Trump did not provide many specifics, such as whether certain classes of pharmaceuticals would be exempt, beyond stating that these tariffs are separate from the country-specific duties that came into effect last week. However, the announcement appears to contradict the terms of the European Union deal struck in July, which the European Commission president said placed a 15-percent tariff "ceiling" on multiple sectors, including pharmaceuticals.
Experts had already warned that the 15 percent tariff outlined in the EU trade deal could end up costing the pharmaceutical industry billions.
The cost implications could also be seen as conflicting with the administration's separate attempts to lower the price of prescription drugs.
President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen meets with President Donald Trump in Turnberry, Scotland, on July 27, 2025.
President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen meets with President Donald Trump in Turnberry, Scotland, on July 27, 2025.In May, Trump signed an executive order directing the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to "ensure foreign countries are not engaged in practices that purposefully and unfairly undercut market prices and drive price hikes in the United States." It also proposed that the U.S. be given Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) status, which would require drug companies to offer Americans the same lowest price that drugs are sold for in other countries.
Trump followed this up by sending letters to 17 of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies on July 31, outlining steps they must take within 60 days to lower prescription prices for U.S. customers. These include extending MFN pricing to Medicaid, guaranteeing MFN pricing for new medications and negotiating "harder with foreign freeloading nations."
The letters also call on the companies to expand direct-to-consumer distribution models to ensure customers "get the same low MFN prices that manufacturers already offer to third-party payers."
"At face value, these tariffs are contradictory to his efforts to lower domestic prices," Ballreich told Newsweek.
"However, if the tariffs are used as a threat to get drug companies to comply to his administration's [executive orders], including the recent letters to pharmaceutical CEOs, then I think we could see some changes to the pharmaceutical market, which will lower domestic drug prices."
Several drugmakers, including Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, have also pledged to expand their U.S. manufacturing presence. Prior to the letters being sent, but amid this pressure from the administration, a number had also announced they would be reducing some U.S. drug prices.
Health policy analyst Mariana Socal warned that beyond potential cost implications, the tariffs could significantly disrupt the drug development pipeline, potentially jeopardizing the release of new medications.
"Aside from the problem of added costs, the uncertainty introduced by tariff policies is detrimental in and of itself to the pharmaceutical market," she told Newsweek, noting that only around one in 10,000 investigated compounds make it to pharmacy shelves, and only do so after decades of work.
"Any added uncertainty is likely to be detrimental to this industry, including disincentivizing investors from supporting this industry and pharmaceutical manufacturers from continuing to look for cures," she said.
What People Are Saying
Health economist Jeromie Ballreich told Newsweek: "This tariff could really disrupt the U.S. prescription drug market, especially the Medicare part D market, where the party plans will be on the hook for the higher price prices and result in significant premium increases to offset these higher prices. Given that, I don't think it's likely that this massive tariff will occur, but rather is a threat to force companies to find solutions based on the executive orders and his recent letters to pharmaceutical CEOs."
Mariana Socal, an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told Newsweek: "It is critical to continue to identify solutions to lower drug prices in America and improve drug affordability for Americans. However, it is unclear how tariffs would advance affordability. On the opposite, tariffs can be understood as a hidden tax."
"In the short term, the likelihood that added costs from tariffs will be passed through to consumers can be reduced by existing contractual agreements with supply chain participants such as distributors and group purchasing organizations, which can protect buyers from price increases for 1-3 years," she added. "However, even if the added cost of tariffs would not necessarily be passed-through to patients in the short term, it could raise costs in the long run."
What Happens Next
On Sunday, Trump said he would be announcing tariffs on the industry "within the next week or so."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Trump Admin's Heinous Branding Of An Indiana Detention Facility Is Getting Major Backlash
On Tuesday, the Trump administration unveiled another disturbing nickname for an immigrant detention facility — this time in Indiana. 'If you are in America illegally, you could find yourself in Indiana's Speedway Slammer,' Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem wrote in a post on X. DHS then shared an image of a race caradorned with ICE lettering and bearing a No. 5 label, which is the number for Pato O'Ward, the only Mexican driver in the IndyCar series. Both posts allude to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, which famously hosts the Indy 500 each year, and is located roughly 75 miles from a newly announced detention site. They also come as MAGA voters have gleefully welcomed Republicans' shocking moniker for the 'Alligator Alcatraz' facility in the Everglades — and point to how Trump officials have used these names to make light of their cruel practices. In a press release, Noem said the agency would be partnering with Indiana to detain as many as 1,000 immigrants at the state's Miami Correctional Facility. The arrangement is similar to the one the administration used in Florida: Under a policy known as 287(g), federal authorities can work with state and local officials on expanding immigration enforcement, including detention. In Indiana's case, it won't be building a new facility,but housing people in vacant beds at an existing one. Noem's branding attempts have generated significant backlash given how casually the agency is referring to an immigrant detention facility, which plays a key role in Trump's violent and hardline enforcement practices. Additionally, the graphic containing O'Ward's car number hasbeen criticized as racist since it appears to single him out, as federal agents have targeted Mexican immigrants and other people of color. The use of the speedway imagery has been contested as well, with IndyCar requesting that its intellectual property not be utilized in this way. 'It caught a lot of people off guard. Definitely caught me off guard,' O'Ward said on Wednesday of the DHS image. 'I was just a little bit shocked at the coincidences of that and, you know, of what it means... I don't think it made a lot of people proud, to say the least.' IndyCar also pushed back in a Wednesday statement. 'We were unaware of plans to incorporate our imagery as part of yesterday's announcement,' the organization said. 'Consistent with our approach to public policy and political issues, we are communicating our preference that our IP not be utilized moving forward in relation to this matter.'The town of Speedway, Indiana, which is home to the famous racetrack, put out a statement noting that it hadn't been involved in the naming process, either. 'An AI generated image of a car with 'ICE' on the side does not violate anyone's intellectual property rights,' a DHS spokesperson said in a response to IndyCar. 'DHS will continue promoting the 'Speedway Slammer' as a comprehensive and collaborative approach to combating illegal immigration.' DHS' actions follow Noem's statements describing 'Alligator Alcatraz' as amodel that the agency intends to replicate across multiple states due to what she says are cost savings and convenience the federal government can get out of these partnerships. The Florida facility has been condemned for the inhumane treatment of detainees there, including a lack of water to bathe in, sweltering temperatures, and unreliable access to counsel. Related... Judge Orders Temporary Halt To 'Alligator Alcatraz' Construction In Florida Members Of Congress Sue Trump Administration For Access To ICE Detention Centers FEMA Says It's Sending $608 Million To States To Build Migrant Detention Centers
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Where Trump and Putin could meet as presidents expected to reunite for Ukraine ceasefire summit
Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump are set to meet next week, the Kremlin has confirmed. In what would be the first summit between leaders of the two countries since 2021, Trump and Putin will meet in search of a breakthrough to end the Ukraine war. The announcement comes a day after US special envoy Steve Witkoff held talks with Putin in an attempt to convince the Russian president to sign a ceasefire agreement with Ukraine. "At the suggestion of the American side, an agreement was essentially reached to hold a bilateral meeting at the highest level in the coming days, that is, a meeting between President Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump," Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said. He said a summit venue had been agreed, but would be announced later. Here, The Independent looks at the countries that could set the stage for the momentous occasion. Reykjavik, Iceland - an echo of the Cold War Iceland's capital Reykjavik is one option, as it is symbolic of past US–Russia diplomatic relations. Reykjavik hosted the 1986 summit between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, which was seen as a turning point in the Cold War. Although that meeting ended without a formal agreement, it laid the groundwork for future nuclear arms reduction treaties and helped ease tensions between the two warring nations. Trump has often compared himself to Reagan, as a self-proclaimed 'deal-maker'. Reykjavik would, therefore, carry significant symbolism for the US president. Doha, Qatar - the world's new neutral peace broker Qatar, once known as a small petrostate, has emerged as one of the world's most trusted mediators in recent years. It has hosted negotiations between the US and Taliban, brokered ceasefire talks in Gaza, and positioned itself as a diplomatic bridge between Western powers and its adversaries. Doha has strong relationships with both Moscow and Washington, and it has a preference for discreet diplomacy. This makes it an attractive location for both Putin and Trump. Earlier this year, during his trip to the Middle East, the US president marvelled at the wealth of his Arab hosts, admiring the marble in the Qatari palace as 'perfecto' and 'very hard to buy.' His admiration for the country and its leaders could mean Trump suggests it as the meeting place. Russia is also deepening its ties with countries in the Middle East, and if Putin were to suggest Qatar, it would signify a move away from traditional Western capitals and towards more flexible, non-aligned powers. Geneva, Switzerland - the traditional choice Geneva has long existed as a staple for global summits. It was the site of the most recent US–Russia presidential meeting, when Joe Biden met Vladimir Putin there in 2021. Switzerland, famous for its neutrality, has also hosted numerous historic encounters, from Cold War arms talks to Iran nuclear negotiations. Due to its experience in high-stakes diplomacy, Switzerland is a practical choice. However, for Moscow, Geneva may now feel too Western-aligned particularly after Switzerland adopted EU sanctions over the Ukraine war. Nevertheless, Geneva remains a strong meeting ground for traditional diplomacy. Belgrade, Serbia - Moscow friendly location Serbia is seen by many as a geopolitical in-between – it has maintained warm relations with Moscow while also seeking closer ties with the West. It has also refused to join Western sanctions against Russia, and has hosted various informal meetings between Russia and Western officials since the beginning of the war. For Putin, Belgrade is a welcoming environment that is not too overtly pro-Russian. Similarly, for Trump, it may suggest neutrality, which could avoid the backlash he faced after his 2018 summit with the Russian president in Helsinki. Abu Dhabi or Dubai, UAE - Quick and convenient Putin met with the president of the United Arab Emirates on Thursday, which reports have previously suggested as a possible venue. The UAE has quietly become a key broker for diplomacy, particularly between Russia and Ukraine, hosting negotiations over prisoner exchanges. For Trump, a summit in Abu Dhabi or Dubai would provide the grandeur he often opts for, whilst also avoiding the bureaucracy of more traditional Western venues. The UAE also has a strong working relationship with Putin, and has resisted Western sanctions against Russia. Where did Putin and Trump last meet? The last meeting between the two presidents took place in Helsinki, Finland, in July 2018, during Trump's first term as president. Following the meeting, Trump publicly contradicted US intelligence agencies and appeared to take Putin's word over their findings regarding Russian election interference. The remarks caused bipartisan outrage in Washington, with many accusing Trump of having 'sided with the enemy.' At the time, Finland was known for its military neutrality, however, it has since joined Nato and taken a firm stance against Moscow. This means it is almost certainly ruled out as the grounds for their meeting next week. Historic meetings that have shaped world affairs Reagan and Gorbachev - Reykjavik, 1986 The Reykjavik summit between US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev was one of the most important moments during the Cold War. Although the talks collapsed at the last moment over Reagan's refusal to abandon the Strategic Defense Initiative, the two sides came closer than ever to agreeing on sweeping nuclear disarmament. The meeting helped pave the way for the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed the following year. It is often referred to as a turning point in Cold War diplomacy. Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin - Yalta, 1945 The Yalta Conference brought together the 'Big Three' Allied leaders: US president Franklin D. Roosevelt, British prime minister Winston Churchill and Soviet premier Joseph Stalin. Held in February 1945, with Nazi Germany on the brink of defeat, the leaders met to decide the shape of the postwar world. They agreed on the division of Germany into occupation zones, the formation of the United Nations, and the political future of Eastern Europe. However, the legacy of the meeting is mixed. Although it ended the war as a unified front, many historians argue it also led to the inception of the Cold War by legitimising Soviet control over Eastern Europe. Trump and Kim Jong-un - Singapore and Hanoi, 2018-19 Trump became the first sitting US president to meet a North Korean leader when he sat down with Kim Jong-un in Singapore in June 2018. The summit was choreographed as a historic breakthrough, complete with gestures such as handshakes, flags and sweeping promises of denuclearisation. A follow-up meeting in Hanoi in February 2019 ended abruptly without agreement, after talks broke down over US demands for full denuclearisation and North Korea's call for sanctions relief. The meetings produced few results, but they were framed as bold and unprecedented diplomacy. However, they also drew criticism for giving legitimacy to a repressive regime without securing substantive concessions.


New York Post
12 minutes ago
- New York Post
President Trump, do what's right for NYC and endorse Mayor Eric Adams for re-election
President Trump, if you decide to get involved in this year's mayoral race, do what's right for the city we all love: Back Eric Adams. With his commitment to public safety and civic pride, Adams has shown he deserves a second term in Gracie Mansion. He has stood up to the left-wing legislators of Albany and the City Council, the radicals who want to legalize theft, hold no one on bail and empty all the jails. Advertisement 3 President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC, August 6, 2025. REUTERS For the first half of this year, New York enjoyed the lowest number of shootings since the city started keeping track. That didn't happen by accident. Advertisement Socialist Zohran Mamdani would reverse all that progress. The 'defund the police' activist would hobble the NYPD, drive away businesses and make the streets unsafe. We agree Mamdani must be stopped. But don't believe that Andrew Cuomo, who already failed to beat Zohran once, is the answer. He's everything at once Advertisement Reports are that Andrew Cuomo's campaign is heavily lobbying you to help him in the New York City mayoral race. Don't listen to them, Mr. President: You know as well as we do that Cuomo cannot be trusted — except to betray anyone and everyone as fits his convenience. For starters, consider how he treated you during your first term, casting doubt on the 'Trump vaccine.' Then, once Democrats decided it was their vaccine, Cuomo was a leader of the 'you must get jabbed or else you'll be fired' crew. Advertisement 3 Democratic nominee for mayor Zohran Mamdani addresses the media outside the Federal Jacob Javits Building in New York, NY, on August 7, 2025. / MEGA Cuomo was for fracking until he was against fracking. He was for charter schools until he was against charter schools. He signed all of the 'no bail' laws and other 'reforms' that caused crime to skyrocket, but now claims he would 'fix' them. And he still refuses to admit those laws were a mistake. Heck, he won't admit to any mistake, ever. 3 Mayor Eric Adams speaks to supporters before the ribbon-cutting of his campaign's Brooklyn office. Stefano Giovannini How wormy is he? Advertisement On Thursday (after planting stories to the contrary), Cuomo flatly denied talking to you recently. He's also blatantly contradicting himself on how hard he'll 'fight Trump': He recently told business leaders that he's not 'personally' looking for conflict with the president. Hah! A month ago, in advance of the Democratic primary, he was vowing he'd 'spend eight years in Washington' fighting against your agenda. Advertisement No: If you care about the city's future, the man to support is Eric Adams. Adams was one of the few Democrats who stood up to Joe Biden, telling the truth about the massive border crisis. And for that, the previous administration punished him and New York City. Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Found his footing Advertisement There have been missteps, but Adams has lately found his footing — particularly by finding a great police commissioner in Jessica Tisch. Another positive sign: The Police Academy just graduated its largest class in years. Qualified young folks want to join New York's Finest, confident that they have a commish and mayor who'll have their backs. An Adams re-election would mean that excellent work will continue. Advertisement A Commissioner Tisch won't be there under a Cuomo or Mamdani. We're sure Cuomo's pollsters painted a picture about the former governor's chances, but they were wrong in the primary and they are wrong now. All Cuomo is doing is selfishly splitting the vote, trying to hold on to one last shred of relevancy. Adams is supported in his re-election bid by all of the police unions and all the major black churches. You know New York, Mr. President, and understand that's a remarkable coalition — a perfect start on building a majority in November.