Latest news with #PhRMA
The Hill
3 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
Pharma industry loses on Medicare price negotiations
Three separate federal courts ruled against the pharmaceutical industry this week, with some cases having previously been dismissed. A federal judge dismissed the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's lawsuit challenging Medicare negotiations a year ago, and this ruling was upheld Wednesday by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The suit was dismissed on the basis that some of the plaintiffs — the Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, and the Michigan Chamber of Commerce — lacked standing to sue. While the appeals court clarified that local and state organizations can sue over federal laws that impact them, it still found that the case was improperly filed. The court agreed that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had standing to sue, but it would need to file a new lawsuit in a separate venue. On Thursday, Medicare negotiation lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the program were both ruled against. PhRMA, another trade group, saw its lawsuit dismissed by a Texas federal judge who found that the organization had failed to demonstrate irreparable harm or constitutional violations stemming from Medicare negotiations. In Connecticut, the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision from last year against the pharmaceutical company Boehringer Ingelheim. Three of the company's products have been selected for Medicare negotiation. As has been the case in other rulings, such as the one in Texas, the court relied on the fact that participation in Medicare is entirely voluntary, meaning companies are not being deprived of certain rights because of the negotiation program. When reached for comment by The Hill, PhRMA spokesperson Sarah Ryan said, 'We disagree with the district court's legal assessment. We continue to believe the IRA's price-setting provisions are unconstitutional.' With compounding losses in appellate courts, the pharmaceutical industry may be gearing up to take Medicare negotiations before the Supreme Court.
News.com.au
4 days ago
- Business
- News.com.au
Labor vows to ‘fight' as Trump threatens pharma tariffs
The Albanese government is vowing to 'fight for the PBS' as Donald Trump tries to strongarm drugmakers into moving production to the US. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) is a list of federally subsidised medicines and a prized Labor invention. Health Minister Mark Butler last month introduced legislation that, if passed, would cap PBS-listed medicines at $25 from January 1, 2026. Aside from subsidising medicines, the scheme also compels firms to negotiate prices with the federal government, which helps keep products affordable. Celebrated as a cornerstone of the healthcare system in Canberra, the scheme is denounced by pharmaceutical lobbyists in Washington, who claim Australia is 'freeloading on American innovation'. One group, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), has explicitly urged the Trump administration to 'leverage ongoing trade negotiations' to influence Australia's PBS policies. But Anthony Albanese, Mr Butler and other ministers have ruled out budging on the PBS. 'We'll fight for our PBS and fight for the jobs of Australian manufacturers here,' Mr Butler told the ABC on Friday, noting most production is in Melbourne. Pharmaceutical exports to the US totalled north of $2bn in 2024, making it the biggest foreign market for Australian producers. Exports are mostly blood products and vaccines but also include packaged medicines and miscellaneous medical items, such as bandages. Though, as Mr Butler noted, the US still exported more to Australia and did so without tariffs. 'We have zero tariffs on those imports that we take from America companies,' he said. 'We're making the case that should continue in reverse. 'We should be able to continue to export our terrific blood and plasma products and medicines to Americans without what might be a 250 per cent tariff.' For the moment, Mr Trump's concern with the sector appears to be largely driven by bringing down prices in the US rather than punishing allies for having cheaper medicines. Last week, he wrote to 17 major pharmaceutical companies demanding they lower their prices for American consumers to bring them in line with prices overseas. A Rand Corporation report found that Americans pay nearly four times more than Australians for medicines and about three times more than the average in other developed economies. The answer, according to Mr Trump, is making pharmaceuticals in the US. Mr Trump's 250 per cent tariff threat was a warning shot to firms, but one that, if realised, would hit producers Down Under hard.
The Hill
4 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
Two more cases challenging Medicare negotiation rejected in federal courts
Federal judges in Texas and Connecticut on Thursday ruled against arguments challenging the constitutionality of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, delivering two more blows to the pharmaceutical industry this week after an appeals court upheld the dismissal of a similar case. In Connecticut, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision granted by U.S. District Judge Michael P. Shea last year against pharmaceutical company Boehringer Ingelheim. The company's diabetes medication Jardiance was among the first 10 drugs chosen for Medicare negotiations and two more of its products were chosen for the following round of negotiations. In his 2024 ruling, Shea found that Boehringer Ingelheim could not demonstrate irreparable harm as a result of Medicare negotiations and also agreed with the federal government that the program did not violate laws such as the Medicare Act or the Administrative Procedures Act. Boehringer Ingelheim had also argued Medicare negotiations violated its First and Fifth Amendment rights. In its ruling on Thursday, the Second District Court of Appeals concurred with Shea's ruling, finding that the company's claims of unconstitutionality were not proven in their argument. 'Participation in the Negotiation Program is voluntary and thus does not entail an unlawful deprivation of rights,' the judgment stated. 'The program does not impose unconstitutional conditions on Boehringer's ability to participate in Medicare and Medicaid because the program is designed to promote the legitimate government purpose of controlling Medicare spending and does not regulate the company's conduct in the private market.' The Hill has reached out to Boehringer Ingelheim for comment. In Texas, Senior U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra dismissed the lawsuit brought forward by the trade group PhRMA with prejudice, closing the case. As in Connecticut and other cases challenging Medicare negotiations, Ezra noted that drugmaker participation in Medicare is entirely voluntary. Ezra stated that because of the voluntary participation, drugmakers do not have a protected interest to sell drugs to Medicare at their preferred 'fair market value.' He similarly found that the plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate that they will suffer irreparable harm due to negotiating drug prices and was unconvinced of claims that the program violated the plaintiffs' Fifth and Eighth Amendment rights. 'In sum, Plaintiffs cannot demonstrate that the Program deprives them of a protected interest and therefore their Due Process Clause claim fails as a matter of law,' wrote Ezra, granting the federal government's request for summary judgment. The Hill has requested comment from PhRMA. These decisions come just one day after a federal judge upheld a ruling to dismiss a similar challenge to Medicare negotiations brought forward by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The courts found that several of the plaintiffs attached to the case lacked standing to sue. Merith Basey, executive director of the advocacy group Patients For Affordable Drugs, lauded the rulings in a statement Thursday. 'Once again, a drug company brought its high-priced lawyers to lay out its arguments against Medicare negotiation, and once again they have lost. This ruling against Boehringer Ingelheim marks the fifth consecutive legal victory for patients who have long awaited relief from Big Pharma's monopoly control over drug prices,' said Basey. 'It's truly US v Big Pharma. Patients For Affordable Drugs stands firm in our commitment to defending the hard-won Medicare negotiation program against Big Pharma's relentless attempts to undermine it at the expense of patients,' she added.
Daily Telegraph
5 days ago
- Health
- Daily Telegraph
Labor looks to speed up PBS listings amid calls from lobby groups
Don't miss out on the headlines from Illness. Followed categories will be added to My News. Health Minister Mark Butler says he is looking at recommendations to speed up medicine approvals amid pressure from lobbyists both within Australia and in the US. Medicines Australia has repeatedly highlighted that Australia lags behind comparable countries in listing new medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) – a list of federally subsidised medicines. It takes an average of 466 days from when the Therapeutic Goods Administration approves a medicine to when it becomes affordable on the PBS, according to the peak body. This is much longer than in the UK and Canada, for example. The lengthy timeline has also angered the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which has framed the PBS as a 'non-tariff trade barrier' that harms American companies in representations to the Trump administration. Lengthy PBS listing times is among PhRMA's core criticisms. Mr Butler said on Thursday he would look at Medicines Australia's recommendations to make the 'approvals system quicker'. Powerful pharmaceutical lobbyists in the US have accused Australia of 'freeloading' on the high prices paid by American consumers. Picture: Martin Ollman / NewsWire 'We're getting an enormous number of new medicining coming on to the market,' he told the ABC. 'We're living through a turbocharged period of discovery bringing more and more new medicine, so making sure that we can assess them and approve them very quickly to get them into patients as quickly as possible is something I've said is a real priority for us this term.' Because the PBS compels drugmakers to negotiate prices with the federal government, PhRMA has accused Australia of 'freeloading' on US-funded research and development. Meanwhile, American consumers pick up the bill, according to the lobby group. 'The medicines industry, understandably, given their interest, want to make prices higher as well, so there will be a bit of a debate about how we do that,' Mr Butler said. 'But I'm very much on the page of getting medicines more quickly into our system, our PBS system. 'It's a terrific system and we're trying to make medicines cheaper at the same time for Australians.' PhRMA has explicitly urged the Trump administration to 'leverage ongoing trade negotiations' to influence Australia's PBS policies. Mr Butler has echoed Anthony Albanese and fellow senior government ministers in ruling out any 'compromise' on the system as part of tariff talks. US President Donald Trump has written to 17 major drugmakers demanding they drop prices in line with other developed economies. Picture: Brendan Smialowski / AFP For the moment, Donald Trump's concern with the sector appears to be largely focused on bringing down prices in the US rather than punishing allies for having cheaper medicines. A RAND Corporation report found that Americans pay nearly four times more than Australians for medicines and about three times more than the average in other developed economies. The answer, according to the US President, is to make pharmaceuticals in the US. In a warning shot to firms, Mr Trump this week threatened to slap tariffs of up to 250 per cent on foreign-made products. With Australian pharma exports to the US worth more than $2bn in 2024, it would hit producers Down Under hard. Exports are mostly blood products and vaccines but also include packaged medicines and miscellaneous products, such as bandages. 'We'll be putting (an) initially small tariff on pharmaceuticals,' Mr Trump told US business news channel CNBC. 'In one year, 1½ years maximum, it's going to go to 150 per cent and then it's going to go to 250 per cent because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country.' He did not say what the initial rate would be, but earlier in the year he said duties on the sector would start from 25 per cent. Mr Trump last week wrote to 17 major pharmaceutical companies demanding they lower their prices for American consumers and bring them in line with prices overseas. Originally published as Labor looks to speed up PBS listings amid calls from lobby groups
Perth Now
5 days ago
- Business
- Perth Now
Big problem with essential Aussie scheme
Health Minister Mark Butler says he is looking at recommendations to speed up medicine approvals amid pressure from lobbyists both within Australia and in the US. Medicines Australia has repeatedly highlighted that Australia lags behind comparable countries in listing new medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) – a list of federally subsidised medicines. It takes an average of 466 days from when the Therapeutic Goods Administration approves a medicine to when it becomes affordable on the PBS, according to the peak body. This is much longer than in the UK and Canada, for example. The lengthy timeline has also angered the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which has framed the PBS as a 'non-tariff trade barrier' that harms American companies in representations to the Trump administration. Lengthy PBS listing times is among PhRMA's core criticisms. Mr Butler said on Thursday he would look at Medicines Australia's recommendations to make the 'approvals system quicker'. Powerful pharmaceutical lobbyists in the US have accused Australia of 'freeloading' on the high prices paid by American consumers. Martin Ollman / NewsWire Credit: News Corp Australia 'We're getting an enormous number of new medicining coming on to the market,' he told the ABC. 'We're living through a turbocharged period of discovery bringing more and more new medicine, so making sure that we can assess them and approve them very quickly to get them into patients as quickly as possible is something I've said is a real priority for us this term.' Because the PBS compels drugmakers to negotiate prices with the federal government, PhRMA has accused Australia of 'freeloading' on US-funded research and development. Meanwhile, American consumers pick up the bill, according to the lobby group. 'The medicines industry, understandably, given their interest, want to make prices higher as well, so there will be a bit of a debate about how we do that,' Mr Butler said. 'But I'm very much on the page of getting medicines more quickly into our system, our PBS system. 'It's a terrific system and we're trying to make medicines cheaper at the same time for Australians.' PhRMA has explicitly urged the Trump administration to 'leverage ongoing trade negotiations' to influence Australia's PBS policies. Mr Butler has echoed Anthony Albanese and fellow senior government ministers in ruling out any 'compromise' on the system as part of tariff talks. For the moment, Donald Trump's concern with the sector appears to be largely focused on bringing down prices in the US rather than punishing allies for having cheaper medicines. A RAND Corporation report found that Americans pay nearly four times more than Australians for medicines and about three times more than the average in other developed economies. The answer, according to the US President, is to make pharmaceuticals in the US. In a warning shot to firms, Mr Trump this week threatened to slap tariffs of up to 250 per cent on foreign-made products. With Australian pharma exports to the US worth more than $2bn in 2024, it would hit producers Down Under hard. Exports are mostly blood products and vaccines but also include packaged medicines and miscellaneous products, such as bandages. 'We'll be putting (an) initially small tariff on pharmaceuticals,' Mr Trump told US business news channel CNBC. 'In one year, 1½ years maximum, it's going to go to 150 per cent and then it's going to go to 250 per cent because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country.' He did not say what the initial rate would be, but earlier in the year he said duties on the sector would start from 25 per cent. Mr Trump last week wrote to 17 major pharmaceutical companies demanding they lower their prices for American consumers and bring them in line with prices overseas.
