Donald Trump vows to unleash ‘every tool in our arsenal' in price row with British drug firms
The US President waged war with a total of seventeen firms demanding 'binding commitments' to match the lower prices offered to developing countries.
The move comes as the White House hit dozens of countries with a fresh slew of tariffs including punishing levies on neighbour Canada.
Two UK drug firms, AstraZeneca and GSK, caught up in the pharma row saw their share price drop as Trump aims to lower prices for American citizens.
The move could even have damaging consequences for the NHS whose leverage with suppliers due to its size could be reduced.
Mr Trump has demanded the firms apply their 'most favoured nation' rates to Medicaid which is the health system for low-income Americans.
He said: 'Make no mistake: a collaborative effort towards achieving global pricing parity would be the most effective path for companies, the government, and American patients.
In a letter to the firms, he said: 'But if you refuse to step up we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices.
'Americans are demanding lower drug prices, and they need them today.'
Around £16 billion was wiped off shares in the sector across Europe as fears grow higher prices in the rest of the world will fund the US reductions.
The move comes after Trump said back in May that he wanted drug prices in the US to be reduced by 80 per cent.
Moment Trump 'throws shade' at Meghan and Harry during Starmer press conference
But experts appeared wary that he has the authority to reduce prices and a previous effort in his first term failed in court.
At the time, he said the tactics were 'subsidising socialism' abroad in paying for the same pills from the same factories, which led to spiralling prices at home.
The warning came as Mr Trump signed an executive order applying a wave of tariffs to 68 countries and the European Union.
Canada was hit with levies – up to 35 per cent from 25 per cent - due to its lack of co-operation in stopping flow of illegal drugs and fentanyl into America.
Their PM Mark Carney said that his country was 'making historic investments in border security to arrest drag traffickers and end migrant smuggling'.
Switzerland will also keep negotiating with the US after their tariff rate hit 39 per cent, which was far higher than they anticipated.
1
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Households could net thousands of pounds in savings from clean tech
Households with clean tech including heat pumps, solar panels and home charging for electric cars could save £37,000 over 15 years, a report suggests. But high initial costs of adopting the green technologies are a barrier for most people, with 92% of those on lower incomes feeling they are 'out of reach', the research by energy company Ovo warns. The firm is calling for an expansion of grants and low-cost loans to help people make the switch to green tech, particularly low income households, as well as a social tariff to support vulnerable people through the UK's transition to clean energy. And it joins widespread calls to reduce the cost of electricity, which is significantly more expensive than gas due in part to high policy costs added to power bills, to further incentivise the switch to electric heat pumps and cars. The report from Ovo, which has been reviewed by academics from the universities of Exeter, Leeds and Stirling, warns delaying the shift to the clean tech that is critical for the UK's efforts to cut climate emissions has a major financial impact for households. It looks at six green measures: heat pumps, home insulation, solar panels, leased electric vehicles (EV), a home EV charger and a smart meter. The average household installing all the measures would pay out, after incentives, around £15,500 to make the green switch. But they would get the return on their investment within five years, with savings on bills from the insulation, efficient heat pumps, home-generated solar, battery storage of power and EVs which are cheaper to run than petrol equivalents totalling around £17,600 by that point, the study suggests. And 15 years after installation, net savings could total more than £37,000. Even if the cost of inflation and borrowing to invest in the green tech is taken into account, net savings could add up to more than £23,000 over 15 years, the report says. However surveying for the report also found nearly three quarters of people (72%) cited upfront costs as their main reason for delaying adopting green technology, with two thirds (67%) needing to prioritise immediate financial needs over long term savings. And 92% of households with an annual income of less than £30,000 in the survey said green technologies feel 'out of reach' financially. That is despite nearly four fifths (78%) of the more than 4,000 people polled by Strand Partners saying they wanted to decarbonise their home further. People living in private rental homes are in a particular bind, with 81% feeling 'trapped in energy inefficient homes' with landlords not incentivised to pay the upfront costs when bill savings will be realised by their tenants. There was also a lack of knowledge about green technologies, with just 41% of households in the survey aware heat pumps could reduce their energy bills over time, and 64% of respondents were confused about which technologies would be most suitable for their home. But alongside the financial savings clean tech can offer, there is growing evidence energy efficiency can increase property values, reduce exposure to sudden market shocks and improve daily life for example by making homes more comfortable, the report said. David Buttress, Ovo's chief executive, said: 'We've stumbled into a false debate. 'Net zero is framed as expensive and unrealistic – but the data is clear: not decarbonising will cost households and the country far more. 'We talk endlessly about the cost of action and investing in net-zero – but the real crisis is the cost of inaction, and the investment that our energy system would require even without net zero upgrades. 'We need to move away from endless debate and accept that there is a clear economic reason for moving to clean energy sources.' Dr Maximilian Gerrath, of the University of Leeds, said consumers were not just making economic decisions about green tech, 'they're navigating a maze of fear, complexity, and inertia'. 'To accelerate decarbonisation, we must make green homes not just affordable, but easy, visible, and aspirational. 'Most people don't resist green upgrades because they dislike them – they resist because the benefits feel distant, while the costs are immediate,' he said. Nick Davies, head of climate policy at Green Alliance environmental think tank, said: 'Upgrading our homes with clean tech isn't just good for the planet, it's good for our bank balances in the long run too. 'This research shows just how big the green homes bonus can be for households that switch to clean tech like solar, home EV charging and heat pumps. 'We need more households to be able to access government support or finance to cover the upfront costs for these upgrades, so that more people can enjoy the cash-saving benefits of clean technology.' A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesperson said: 'These findings show families can save thousands of pounds every year by upgrading their homes, protecting them from energy price spikes caused by volatile fossil fuel markets. 'We are investing £13.2 billion to upgrade up to five million homes over this parliament, while supporting industry to develop financing models that can remove the upfront cost entirely, helping more households make the switch to cleaner heating in a way that works for them.'
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Epstein victim condemns ‘political warfare' in Trump administration's effort to release grand jury transcripts
A victim of Jeffrey Epstein has condemned what they called the Trump administration's 'political warfare' in its handling of government files on the late convicted sex offender as the Justice Department pushes for the release of grand jury transcripts in his New York federal case. Epstein was a wealthy financier who died in a New York City jail in 2019 while awaiting trial for federal sex trafficking charges. He had been accused of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls. About a decade earlier, Epstein pleaded guilty to Florida state charges of soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution. Early last month, the DOJ and FBI came out with a memo stating there was no so-called client list of powerful people who may have partaken in Epstein's crimes; it also said Epstein did, in fact, die by suicide, and 'no further disclosure [of information regarding Epstein] would be appropriate or warranted.' The memo sparked backlash, notably from Trump's own base, as it left many unanswered questions and concerns the government may be covering up materials that would be of interest to the public. Trump then asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to 'produce any and all pertinent' grand jury testimony from the investigations into Epstein, 'subject to Court approval,' citing the 'ridiculous amount of publicity' over them. A Florida judge quickly denied the DOJ's request but the feds' bid in New York is still being considered. Victims in the New York case were asked to respond to the DOJ's request and two of them did so in court documents filed Monday. Both were unnamed as is their right to remain anonymous. One Epstein survivor wrote to District Judge Richard Berman, 'Dear United States, I wish you would have handled and would handle the whole 'Epstein Files' with more respect towards and for the victims. I am not some pawn in your political warfare.' 'What you have done and continue to do is eating at me day after day as you help to perpetuate this story indefinitely. Why not be completely transparent? Show us all the files with only the necessary redactions! Be done with it and allow me/us to heal,' the victim said. In the letter to the judge the victim also seemingly called out the Trump administration for what they said was its protection of the wealthy over Epstein's victims. 'You protect yourself and your powerful and wealthy 'friends' (not enemies) over the victims, why? The victims know the truth, we know who are in the files and now so do you,' the victim said. It's unclear who exactly the victim was referring to, but Trump's decades-old relationship with Epstein has recently been scrutinized, and there have been reports the president was told his name appears in the Epstein files. Trump reportedly cut ties with Epstein before his 2008 plea deal and appearing in the files does not mean there was any wrongdoing. Trump himself has denied any wrongdoing. The victim asked Berman to have the attorneys of the victims review any suggested redactions if the transcripts are released. The Independent has reached out to the White House and DOJ for comment. Another victim told Berman: 'The latest attention on the 'Epstein Files', the 'Client List' is OUT OF CONTROL and the ones that are left to suffer are not the high-profile individuals, IT IS THE VICTIMS. Why the lack of concern in handling such sensitive information for the victims sake?' That survivor also called out the feds for what they saw as protecting 'wealthy men.' 'I feel like the DOJ's and FBI's priority is protecting the 'third-party', the wealthy men by focusing on scrubbing their names off the files of which the victims, 'know who they are,'' they said. The victim asked Berman to consider a third-party review of any documents that may be released ' to ensure that NO victims names or likenesses are revealed.'
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Electric cars eligible for new government grants revealed
The first electric car models eligible for new government grants have been revealed. The discount will be automatically applied at the point of sale. These are the first models approved under the new £650 million electric car grant. This will enable motorists purchasing a new electric car to save either £1,500 or £3,750, depending on sustainability criteria. It is hoped the measure will encourage more drivers to switch to electric motoring. Drivers will be able to save £1,500 with the purchase of new Citroen e-C3, e-C4, e-C5 and e-Berlingo cars, the Department for Transport (DfT) said. The DfT said many drivers cite upfront costs as a 'key barrier' to buying an EV, and the grant will bring down prices so they 'more closely match their petrol and diesel counterparts'. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said: 'With the first four models approved today, and more to come over the next few weeks, this summer we're making owning an electric car cheaper, easier and a reality for thousands more people across the UK. 'Once again we're delivering our plan for change by standing firmly on the side of motorists and manufacturers, driving down costs for consumers, supporting jobs and putting money back in people's pockets.' Greg Taylor, managing director of Citroen UK, said: 'We want everyone to have the opportunity to make the switch to an electric car, and this support will help make our cars more accessible for our customers.' Edmund King, AA president, said 'any government support to boost the demand for EVs is welcome', adding: 'This discount of £1,500 for some more affordable EVs will help a number of those with tighter budgets. 'We look forward to seeing the full list of discounts up to £3,750 on more models to really push the market forward.' Dan Caesar, chief executive of lobby group Electric Vehicles UK, welcomed the announcement and called for manufacturers to 'support a scheme which the EV industry needs to be conspicuously successful'. Under the government's zero emission vehicle (Zev) mandate, at least 28 per cent of new cars sold by each manufacturer in the UK this year must be zero emission, which generally means pure electric. Across all manufacturers, the figure during the first half of the year was 21.6 per cent. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced in April that sales of new hybrids that cannot be plugged in will be permitted to continue until 2035. Changes to the Zev mandate also mean it will be easier for manufacturers who do not meet the targets to avoid fines.
