
Why Are Prescription Drug Prices So High in America? A Global Price Comparison
Prescription drugs cost more in the United States than anywhere else in the world. President Donald Trump and some bipartisan senators want to change that.
Trump has so far issued several actions related to prescription drug prices. The latest, announced May 12, is a Most Favored Nation Prescription Drug policy, requiring pharmaceutical companies to offer their lowest price to U.S. customers.
An earlier order aimed to ensure that the middlemen in the drug supply chain can't hold on to rebates provided by pharmaceutical companies and instead must pass savings on to Medicare beneficiaries.
In all, the president has taken at least a dozen actions to reduce prescription drug costs, while no less than nine Senate bills aim for the same results.
Some of these ideas have been introduced before.
Trump's Most Favored Nation pricing plan was introduced near the end of his first term.
The plan was stalled by court challenges, and President Joe Biden dropped it shortly after taking office.
A plan to make vendors pass manufacturer discounts on to Medicare beneficiaries was proposed in 2020. Biden rescinded it before it took effect.
There have been modest successes, including a pilot program begun by Trump in 2020 to cap insulin costs for Medicare Part B beneficiaries at $35 per month. At the time, a single vial of insulin cost about $100 in the United States.
That program was a success, and the idea was later broadened to include all Medicare beneficiaries through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. By 2024, most major drug companies had voluntarily limited out-of-pocket expenses for insulin for all U.S. customers to $35.
Yet Americans still pay nearly three times as much for prescription medication as any peer nation, often even more.
Trulicity, a medication for Type 2 diabetics, was listed for $67 in France, according to a 2021 Government Accountability Report. In the United States, it cost $798.
Meanwhile, Remlivid, an oral cancer medication, was listed for $4,723 in Australia. In the United States, it was listed at almost five times that price: $22,048.
Gross prices given in U.S. dollars Drug Name United States Australia Ontario, Canada France Xarelto Oral Tablet 15mg 471 64 78 67 Trulicity Subcutaneious Solution 1.5mg, 5ml 798 Not Covered Not Covered 89 Tremfya Subcutaneous Solution 100mg / 1ml 11,437 2,594 Not Covered 1,991 Remlivid Oral Capsule 5mg 22,048 4,723 7,716 Not Covered
Why? One answer is that other governments leverage the power of their national health plans to control pricing, while the United States lacks a comprehensive national prescription drug strategy.
The solution, according to at least one senator, is to stop putting patches on a broken system and take a comprehensive approach to regulating the entire pharmaceutical supply chain.
Some nations can negotiate low prices for prescription drugs because they have national health care plans, which gives them near complete control over the drug market. Here's how that works for some, according to the Government Accountability Office.
Australia has a national health care system that is partly administered by state, territorial, and local governments.
Prescription drug pricing is set at the national level, starting with an assessment of the drug's value. That assessment is made by Australia's independent Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, which evaluates new drugs for cost-effectiveness and may recommend them for inclusion on the list of approved medications under the national health plan.
That decision is made by Australia's national minister of health, who then negotiates with the manufacturer to determine a price. Among other considerations, the health minister evaluates the impact of adding the drug on the country's budget.
Canada keeps prescription prices low in two ways. First, Canada's federal government sets a maximum allowable price for each medication. The government bases this price, in part, on the therapeutic value of the drug. That value may be higher if the drug is the first of its kind, or lower if there are similar drugs already on the market.
Second, the country's 13 provincial and territorial health plans negotiate pricing jointly with manufacturers, combining the power of their respective markets.
France has a national health care system that includes prescription drugs.
The French government negotiates prices with manufacturers based on an assessment of the therapeutic value of the drug. The country also places a cap on total prescription spending.
These arrangements significantly lower prescription costs for the government and for patients. But there are drawbacks.
When a U.S. insurance company can't negotiate an acceptable price from a drug manufacturer, the insurer may choose not to cover the drug. However, another company will often cover it, so patients still have options.
However, when a drug is omitted from a national health plan, it may be more difficult to find it or afford it anywhere in that country.
For example, Signifor, a drug used to treat hormonal diseases, was not available in Ontario, Canada, according to a 2021 study by the Government Accountability Office. Some forms of diabetes drug Trulicity were not available in Australia. Cancer medicine Revlimid 5 milligram and 10 milligram capsules were not available in France.
Or, drugs left off the national coverage list may still be available, but at a higher price.
Drug shortages are another problem.
In countries with national health plans, pharmaceutical companies have less incentive to ensure supply. Companies will favor markets where there is more potential for profit.
'[Drug] shortages are a natural outcome of imposing prices divorced from free market processes,' Jeremy Nighohossian, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian think tank, told The Epoch Times.
Stephen Ubl, president and CEO of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said, 'Importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers,' in a May 12 response to Trump's plan.
Hashtags

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


Gulf Insider
4 hours ago
- Gulf Insider
Syrian Islamist Leader Sharaa Will Speak At UN
The Islamist group which rules Syria from Damascus, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), has long been designated as a terrorist organization by the UN, US and UK. But once the hardline group toppled Assad, things changed rapidly. The group's leader and self-declared interim president Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammed al-Jolani) until very recently had a $10 million bounty on his head. In May, President Trump met with Sharaa in Saudi Arabia, praising his 'very strong past' – after which US sanctions on Syria were dropped. That 'strong past' was terrorism plain and simple, including attacks on civilians and overseeing Sharia executions in AQ-held Idlib provice. A week before the Gulf meeting with Trump, Sharaa had suggested the idea of building a Trump Tower in Damascus. Since then, Sharaa has engaged with several US delegations, pushing for positive relations amid an effort to present a 'moderated' and 'reformed' leadership, despite that Jolani had even been part of ISIS early in the Syrian proxy war. This is why a headline which emerged Tuesday is absurd and shocking: the man who founded the Syrian al-Qaeda group Al-Nusra Front is coming to America. One international report says: Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa will visit New York in September to participate in the United Nations General Assembly, according to Sky News Arabic. Reports of Sharaa's intention to address the UN have emerged in Arabic-language media in recent weeks. This would mark the first time a Syrian president has addressed the UN since June 1967, when Nureddin al-Atassi did so after Israel's victory in the Six Day War. Earlier this week, the US endorsed Sharaa's controversial proposal to integrate thousands of foreign jihadists from his group, HTS, into the Syrian military. This is tantamount to Washington nodding in agreement with a plan to regularize global jihadists in the heart of the Middle East. However, Sharaa has certainly not been universally welcomed even in the region. In April, Iraq invited him to the Arab League summit in Baghdad, but his past as a senior member of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) led to strong opposition, given AQI is responsible for thousands of brutal killings of Iraqi civilians. Sharaa chose not to attend the Arab League amid the pressure, and his reported upcoming visit to the UN in New York City could provoke similar resistance. The legal loop hole in all this is that despite his terrorism past, US law allows for sitting heads of state to attend UN headquarters in NY City. And this question is somewhat moot anyway, given that President Trump has already full embraced him, during last month's Riyadh visit.


Gulf Insider
4 hours ago
- Gulf Insider
Trump Bans Citizens Of 12 Countries From Traveling To The US
Having previously hinted he might crack down on foreign visitors, late on Wednesday President Trump signed a proclamation banning nationals from 12 countries from traveling to the US, and introduced travel restrictions on seven others, reintroducing a controversial immigration policy that came to define the early days of his first term. The ban will completely bar travel to the U.S. by citizens of the following countries: Afghanistan, Myanmar (formerly Burma), Chad, The Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Citizens from an additional list of countries will be barred from permanently immigrating to the U.S., along with applying for tourist or student visas; those countries are Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. Citizens from these seven countries will still be eligible for other temporary visas, such as the H-1B or other temporary work visas. The ban only applies to people currently outside the U.S., though anyone currently in the U.S. who leaves could get stuck abroad as a result of it. It also excludes any nationals of these countries who hold green cards, along with anyone traveling to the US for coming major sporting events, including the World Cup in 2026 and the Olympics in 2028. Afghans who receive special immigrant visas, a special visa reserved for Afghans who worked alongside the U.S. military during its two-decade presence in Afghanistan, are also exempt. The administration justified the restrictions in a number of ways. Several of the countries, it said, had unacceptably high temporary visa overstay rates, necessitating a ban. Others, it said, couldn't be relied upon to issue valid passports to verify a person's identity. Haiti, the only country in the Western Hemisphere to face a complete ban, was included because 'hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens flooded into the U.S. during the Biden administration,' the White House said. Click here to read more…


Gulf Insider
4 hours ago
- Gulf Insider
US Refuses Air Cover For European 'Reassurance Force' In Postwar Ukraine
The British and French-led effort to establish a 'coalition of the willing' to stand up to Russia and defend Ukraine just hit another major roadblock, as Bloomberg is reporting Wednesday the US has effectively vetoed a plan to provide American air defenses to back a 'reassurance force' for postwar Ukraine. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has been insisting that US-backed air defenses are key to any future permanent settlement plans for ending the war. Western proposals for ending the war have all featured foreign-backed and monitored security guarantees for Ukraine. On this, Starmer had said back in February that 'There must be a US backstop' and that the 'US security guarantee is the only way to effectively deter Russia from attacking Ukraine again.' After Western billions already sunk into keeping Ukraine's military and civic infrastructure afloat, the UK and France are also seeking from President Trump pledges of future air power, and border surveillance and intelligence. The Europeans also envision a strong, permanent security bulwark backed by the United States along NATO's eastern flank. Yet, President Trump has repeatedly warned allies that if NATO countries don't pay their fair share they won't be protected. This despite European leaders as well as some US politicians expressing recent concern that the Atlantic alliance is becoming weaker than ever, and that Article 5 collective defense is in peril. Trump has lashed out at NATO countries for not even meeting their current two percent spending goal while the unfair burden has long fallen United States. 'We appreciate the work that the allies, particularly France and the United Kingdom together with Germany and others have undertaken to develop the coalition of the willing,' US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker said at a press breifing Brussels on Wednesday. 'We are counting on all our European allies to continue taking the leadership position in contributing military resources and providing the political capital to make security guarantees a reality.' All of this comes as it was only on Tuesday that Dutch slapped down a proposal to increase defense spending to 3.5% of gross domestic product (GDP), key to NATO's capability targets, in a non-binding motion. Click here to read more…