Latest news with #US88
The Advertiser
03-06-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
Harvard in court seeking end to US funding cuts
Harvard University has asked a federal US judge to issue a summary judgment ruling to unfreeze $US2.5 billion ($A3.9b) in funding blocked by President Donald Trump's administration, which it says is illegal. Harvard's filing in the US District Court in Boston on Monday said that it had received 957 orders since April 14 to freeze funding for research pertaining to national security threats, cancer and infectious diseases and more since the country's oldest and wealthiest school rejected a White House list of demands. Trump has said he is trying to force change at Harvard - and other top-level universities across the US - because in his view they have been captured by leftist "woke" thought and become bastions of anti-Semitism. The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment. US District Judge Allison Burroughs has set arguments for July 21 on Harvard's motion for summary judgment, which is a request for a judge to decide a dispute without a trial to determine material facts. Harvard sued the Trump administration in April, alleging the funding freeze violated the school's right to free speech and was arbitrary and capricious. In Monday's court filing, Harvard detailed the terminated grants, including $US88 million ($A136 million) for research into pediatric HIV, $US12 million ($A18 million) for increasing Defense Department awareness of emerging biological threats and $US8 million ($A12 million) to better understand dark energy. The school said ending the funding would destroy ongoing research into cancer treatments, infectious disease and Parkinson's. The Trump administration has opened numerous investigations into Harvard. Some are looking at threats against Jewish students and faculty after pro-Palestinian protests broke out following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent Israeli military actions in Gaza. Other investigations are probing whether Harvard discriminates based on sex and gender, along with the school's ties to foreign governments and international students. The Trump administration revoked Harvard's ability to enrol international students last month, which a judge temporarily blocked after Harvard sued in a separate case. Harvard and other universities say Trump's attacks are threats to freedom of speech and freedom of academics, as well as threats to the schools' very existence. Harvard University has asked a federal US judge to issue a summary judgment ruling to unfreeze $US2.5 billion ($A3.9b) in funding blocked by President Donald Trump's administration, which it says is illegal. Harvard's filing in the US District Court in Boston on Monday said that it had received 957 orders since April 14 to freeze funding for research pertaining to national security threats, cancer and infectious diseases and more since the country's oldest and wealthiest school rejected a White House list of demands. Trump has said he is trying to force change at Harvard - and other top-level universities across the US - because in his view they have been captured by leftist "woke" thought and become bastions of anti-Semitism. The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment. US District Judge Allison Burroughs has set arguments for July 21 on Harvard's motion for summary judgment, which is a request for a judge to decide a dispute without a trial to determine material facts. Harvard sued the Trump administration in April, alleging the funding freeze violated the school's right to free speech and was arbitrary and capricious. In Monday's court filing, Harvard detailed the terminated grants, including $US88 million ($A136 million) for research into pediatric HIV, $US12 million ($A18 million) for increasing Defense Department awareness of emerging biological threats and $US8 million ($A12 million) to better understand dark energy. The school said ending the funding would destroy ongoing research into cancer treatments, infectious disease and Parkinson's. The Trump administration has opened numerous investigations into Harvard. Some are looking at threats against Jewish students and faculty after pro-Palestinian protests broke out following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent Israeli military actions in Gaza. Other investigations are probing whether Harvard discriminates based on sex and gender, along with the school's ties to foreign governments and international students. The Trump administration revoked Harvard's ability to enrol international students last month, which a judge temporarily blocked after Harvard sued in a separate case. Harvard and other universities say Trump's attacks are threats to freedom of speech and freedom of academics, as well as threats to the schools' very existence. Harvard University has asked a federal US judge to issue a summary judgment ruling to unfreeze $US2.5 billion ($A3.9b) in funding blocked by President Donald Trump's administration, which it says is illegal. Harvard's filing in the US District Court in Boston on Monday said that it had received 957 orders since April 14 to freeze funding for research pertaining to national security threats, cancer and infectious diseases and more since the country's oldest and wealthiest school rejected a White House list of demands. Trump has said he is trying to force change at Harvard - and other top-level universities across the US - because in his view they have been captured by leftist "woke" thought and become bastions of anti-Semitism. The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment. US District Judge Allison Burroughs has set arguments for July 21 on Harvard's motion for summary judgment, which is a request for a judge to decide a dispute without a trial to determine material facts. Harvard sued the Trump administration in April, alleging the funding freeze violated the school's right to free speech and was arbitrary and capricious. In Monday's court filing, Harvard detailed the terminated grants, including $US88 million ($A136 million) for research into pediatric HIV, $US12 million ($A18 million) for increasing Defense Department awareness of emerging biological threats and $US8 million ($A12 million) to better understand dark energy. The school said ending the funding would destroy ongoing research into cancer treatments, infectious disease and Parkinson's. The Trump administration has opened numerous investigations into Harvard. Some are looking at threats against Jewish students and faculty after pro-Palestinian protests broke out following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent Israeli military actions in Gaza. Other investigations are probing whether Harvard discriminates based on sex and gender, along with the school's ties to foreign governments and international students. The Trump administration revoked Harvard's ability to enrol international students last month, which a judge temporarily blocked after Harvard sued in a separate case. Harvard and other universities say Trump's attacks are threats to freedom of speech and freedom of academics, as well as threats to the schools' very existence. Harvard University has asked a federal US judge to issue a summary judgment ruling to unfreeze $US2.5 billion ($A3.9b) in funding blocked by President Donald Trump's administration, which it says is illegal. Harvard's filing in the US District Court in Boston on Monday said that it had received 957 orders since April 14 to freeze funding for research pertaining to national security threats, cancer and infectious diseases and more since the country's oldest and wealthiest school rejected a White House list of demands. Trump has said he is trying to force change at Harvard - and other top-level universities across the US - because in his view they have been captured by leftist "woke" thought and become bastions of anti-Semitism. The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment. US District Judge Allison Burroughs has set arguments for July 21 on Harvard's motion for summary judgment, which is a request for a judge to decide a dispute without a trial to determine material facts. Harvard sued the Trump administration in April, alleging the funding freeze violated the school's right to free speech and was arbitrary and capricious. In Monday's court filing, Harvard detailed the terminated grants, including $US88 million ($A136 million) for research into pediatric HIV, $US12 million ($A18 million) for increasing Defense Department awareness of emerging biological threats and $US8 million ($A12 million) to better understand dark energy. The school said ending the funding would destroy ongoing research into cancer treatments, infectious disease and Parkinson's. The Trump administration has opened numerous investigations into Harvard. Some are looking at threats against Jewish students and faculty after pro-Palestinian protests broke out following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent Israeli military actions in Gaza. Other investigations are probing whether Harvard discriminates based on sex and gender, along with the school's ties to foreign governments and international students. The Trump administration revoked Harvard's ability to enrol international students last month, which a judge temporarily blocked after Harvard sued in a separate case. Harvard and other universities say Trump's attacks are threats to freedom of speech and freedom of academics, as well as threats to the schools' very existence.
West Australian
03-06-2025
- Politics
- West Australian
Harvard in court seeking end to US funding cuts
Harvard University has asked a federal US judge to issue a summary judgment ruling to unfreeze $US2.5 billion ($A3.9b) in funding blocked by President Donald Trump's administration, which it says is illegal. Harvard's filing in the US District Court in Boston on Monday said that it had received 957 orders since April 14 to freeze funding for research pertaining to national security threats, cancer and infectious diseases and more since the country's oldest and wealthiest school rejected a White House list of demands. Trump has said he is trying to force change at Harvard - and other top-level universities across the US - because in his view they have been captured by leftist "woke" thought and become bastions of anti-Semitism. The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment. US District Judge Allison Burroughs has set arguments for July 21 on Harvard's motion for summary judgment, which is a request for a judge to decide a dispute without a trial to determine material facts. Harvard sued the Trump administration in April, alleging the funding freeze violated the school's right to free speech and was arbitrary and capricious. In Monday's court filing, Harvard detailed the terminated grants, including $US88 million ($A136 million) for research into pediatric HIV, $US12 million ($A18 million) for increasing Defense Department awareness of emerging biological threats and $US8 million ($A12 million) to better understand dark energy. The school said ending the funding would destroy ongoing research into cancer treatments, infectious disease and Parkinson's. The Trump administration has opened numerous investigations into Harvard. Some are looking at threats against Jewish students and faculty after pro-Palestinian protests broke out following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent Israeli military actions in Gaza. Other investigations are probing whether Harvard discriminates based on sex and gender, along with the school's ties to foreign governments and international students. The Trump administration revoked Harvard's ability to enrol international students last month, which a judge temporarily blocked after Harvard sued in a separate case. Harvard and other universities say Trump's attacks are threats to freedom of speech and freedom of academics, as well as threats to the schools' very existence.
Perth Now
03-06-2025
- Politics
- Perth Now
Harvard in court seeking end to US funding cuts
Harvard University has asked a federal US judge to issue a summary judgment ruling to unfreeze $US2.5 billion ($A3.9b) in funding blocked by President Donald Trump's administration, which it says is illegal. Harvard's filing in the US District Court in Boston on Monday said that it had received 957 orders since April 14 to freeze funding for research pertaining to national security threats, cancer and infectious diseases and more since the country's oldest and wealthiest school rejected a White House list of demands. Trump has said he is trying to force change at Harvard - and other top-level universities across the US - because in his view they have been captured by leftist "woke" thought and become bastions of anti-Semitism. The Trump administration did not immediately respond to a request for comment. US District Judge Allison Burroughs has set arguments for July 21 on Harvard's motion for summary judgment, which is a request for a judge to decide a dispute without a trial to determine material facts. Harvard sued the Trump administration in April, alleging the funding freeze violated the school's right to free speech and was arbitrary and capricious. In Monday's court filing, Harvard detailed the terminated grants, including $US88 million ($A136 million) for research into pediatric HIV, $US12 million ($A18 million) for increasing Defense Department awareness of emerging biological threats and $US8 million ($A12 million) to better understand dark energy. The school said ending the funding would destroy ongoing research into cancer treatments, infectious disease and Parkinson's. The Trump administration has opened numerous investigations into Harvard. Some are looking at threats against Jewish students and faculty after pro-Palestinian protests broke out following the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent Israeli military actions in Gaza. Other investigations are probing whether Harvard discriminates based on sex and gender, along with the school's ties to foreign governments and international students. The Trump administration revoked Harvard's ability to enrol international students last month, which a judge temporarily blocked after Harvard sued in a separate case. Harvard and other universities say Trump's attacks are threats to freedom of speech and freedom of academics, as well as threats to the schools' very existence.
The Advertiser
13-05-2025
- Business
- The Advertiser
Trump order demands US medicine industry cuts prices
US President Donald Trump has signed a wide-reaching executive order directing drug makers to lower the prices of their medicines to align with what other countries pay that analysts and legal experts say could be difficult to implement. The order gives drug makers price targets in the next 30 days, and will take further action to lower prices if those companies do not make "significant progress" towards those goals within six months of the order being signed. Trump told a press conference that the government would impose tariffs on companies if the prices in the US did not match those in other countries and said he was seeking cuts of between 59 per cent and 90 per cent. "Everybody should equalise. Everybody should pay the same price," Trump said. Investors were sceptical about the order's implementation, and shares -which had been down overnight on the threat of "most favoured nation" pricing - recovered and rose in early morning trade on Monday. The United States pays the highest prices for prescription drugs, often nearly three times more than other developed countries. Trump tried in his first term to bring the United States in line with other countries but was blocked by the courts. Trump's drug pricing proposal comes as the president has sought to fulfil a campaign promise of tackling inflation and lowering prices for a host of everyday items, from eggs to petrol. Trump said his order on drug prices was partly a result of a conversation with an unnamed friend who told the president he got a weight loss injection for $US88 ($A138) in London and that the same injection in the US cost $US1300. If drug makers do not meet the government's expectations, it will use rule making to bring drug prices to international levels and consider a range of other measures, including importing medicines from other developed countries and implementing export restrictions, a copy of the order showed. Trade groups representing biotech and pharmaceutical decried the move. "Importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers. It would mean less treatments and cures and would jeopardise the hundreds of billions our member companies are planning to invest in America," PhRMA CEO Stephen Ubl said in a statement. Ubl said the real reasons for high drug prices are other "countries not paying their fair share and middlemen driving up prices for US patients". The order also directs the US Federal Trade Commission to consider aggressive enforcement against what the government calls anti-competitive practices by drug makers. "We're all familiar with some of the places where pharmaceutical companies push the limits to prevent competition that would lower their prices," one White House official said, pointing to patent protections and deals drug makers make with generic companies to hold off on cheaper copies. The executive order is likely to face legal challenges, particularly for exceeding limits set by US law, including on imports of drugs from abroad, health policy lawyer Paul Kim said. "The order's suggestion of broader or direct-to-consumer importation stretches well beyond what the statute allows," Kim said. The FTC has a long history of antitrust enforcement actions against pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies. "President Donald Trump campaigned on lowering drug costs and today he's doing just that. Americans are tired of getting ripped off. The Federal Trade Commission will be a proud partner in this new effort," FTC spokesman Joe Simonson said. The executive order differed from what drug makers had been expecting. Four lobbyist sources told Reuters they were expecting an executive order that called for "most favoured nation" pricing on a subset of Medicare drugs. "Implementing something like this is pretty challenging. He tried to do this before and it was stopped by the courts," said Evan Seigerman, analyst at BMO Capital Markets. The White House officials did not specify any targets. Trump's order also directs the government to consider facilitating direct-to-consumer purchasing programs that would sell drugs at the prices other countries pay. It also orders the Secretary of Commerce and other agency heads to review and consider actions regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or ingredients that may contribute to price differences. US President Donald Trump has signed a wide-reaching executive order directing drug makers to lower the prices of their medicines to align with what other countries pay that analysts and legal experts say could be difficult to implement. The order gives drug makers price targets in the next 30 days, and will take further action to lower prices if those companies do not make "significant progress" towards those goals within six months of the order being signed. Trump told a press conference that the government would impose tariffs on companies if the prices in the US did not match those in other countries and said he was seeking cuts of between 59 per cent and 90 per cent. "Everybody should equalise. Everybody should pay the same price," Trump said. Investors were sceptical about the order's implementation, and shares -which had been down overnight on the threat of "most favoured nation" pricing - recovered and rose in early morning trade on Monday. The United States pays the highest prices for prescription drugs, often nearly three times more than other developed countries. Trump tried in his first term to bring the United States in line with other countries but was blocked by the courts. Trump's drug pricing proposal comes as the president has sought to fulfil a campaign promise of tackling inflation and lowering prices for a host of everyday items, from eggs to petrol. Trump said his order on drug prices was partly a result of a conversation with an unnamed friend who told the president he got a weight loss injection for $US88 ($A138) in London and that the same injection in the US cost $US1300. If drug makers do not meet the government's expectations, it will use rule making to bring drug prices to international levels and consider a range of other measures, including importing medicines from other developed countries and implementing export restrictions, a copy of the order showed. Trade groups representing biotech and pharmaceutical decried the move. "Importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers. It would mean less treatments and cures and would jeopardise the hundreds of billions our member companies are planning to invest in America," PhRMA CEO Stephen Ubl said in a statement. Ubl said the real reasons for high drug prices are other "countries not paying their fair share and middlemen driving up prices for US patients". The order also directs the US Federal Trade Commission to consider aggressive enforcement against what the government calls anti-competitive practices by drug makers. "We're all familiar with some of the places where pharmaceutical companies push the limits to prevent competition that would lower their prices," one White House official said, pointing to patent protections and deals drug makers make with generic companies to hold off on cheaper copies. The executive order is likely to face legal challenges, particularly for exceeding limits set by US law, including on imports of drugs from abroad, health policy lawyer Paul Kim said. "The order's suggestion of broader or direct-to-consumer importation stretches well beyond what the statute allows," Kim said. The FTC has a long history of antitrust enforcement actions against pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies. "President Donald Trump campaigned on lowering drug costs and today he's doing just that. Americans are tired of getting ripped off. The Federal Trade Commission will be a proud partner in this new effort," FTC spokesman Joe Simonson said. The executive order differed from what drug makers had been expecting. Four lobbyist sources told Reuters they were expecting an executive order that called for "most favoured nation" pricing on a subset of Medicare drugs. "Implementing something like this is pretty challenging. He tried to do this before and it was stopped by the courts," said Evan Seigerman, analyst at BMO Capital Markets. The White House officials did not specify any targets. Trump's order also directs the government to consider facilitating direct-to-consumer purchasing programs that would sell drugs at the prices other countries pay. It also orders the Secretary of Commerce and other agency heads to review and consider actions regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or ingredients that may contribute to price differences. US President Donald Trump has signed a wide-reaching executive order directing drug makers to lower the prices of their medicines to align with what other countries pay that analysts and legal experts say could be difficult to implement. The order gives drug makers price targets in the next 30 days, and will take further action to lower prices if those companies do not make "significant progress" towards those goals within six months of the order being signed. Trump told a press conference that the government would impose tariffs on companies if the prices in the US did not match those in other countries and said he was seeking cuts of between 59 per cent and 90 per cent. "Everybody should equalise. Everybody should pay the same price," Trump said. Investors were sceptical about the order's implementation, and shares -which had been down overnight on the threat of "most favoured nation" pricing - recovered and rose in early morning trade on Monday. The United States pays the highest prices for prescription drugs, often nearly three times more than other developed countries. Trump tried in his first term to bring the United States in line with other countries but was blocked by the courts. Trump's drug pricing proposal comes as the president has sought to fulfil a campaign promise of tackling inflation and lowering prices for a host of everyday items, from eggs to petrol. Trump said his order on drug prices was partly a result of a conversation with an unnamed friend who told the president he got a weight loss injection for $US88 ($A138) in London and that the same injection in the US cost $US1300. If drug makers do not meet the government's expectations, it will use rule making to bring drug prices to international levels and consider a range of other measures, including importing medicines from other developed countries and implementing export restrictions, a copy of the order showed. Trade groups representing biotech and pharmaceutical decried the move. "Importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers. It would mean less treatments and cures and would jeopardise the hundreds of billions our member companies are planning to invest in America," PhRMA CEO Stephen Ubl said in a statement. Ubl said the real reasons for high drug prices are other "countries not paying their fair share and middlemen driving up prices for US patients". The order also directs the US Federal Trade Commission to consider aggressive enforcement against what the government calls anti-competitive practices by drug makers. "We're all familiar with some of the places where pharmaceutical companies push the limits to prevent competition that would lower their prices," one White House official said, pointing to patent protections and deals drug makers make with generic companies to hold off on cheaper copies. The executive order is likely to face legal challenges, particularly for exceeding limits set by US law, including on imports of drugs from abroad, health policy lawyer Paul Kim said. "The order's suggestion of broader or direct-to-consumer importation stretches well beyond what the statute allows," Kim said. The FTC has a long history of antitrust enforcement actions against pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies. "President Donald Trump campaigned on lowering drug costs and today he's doing just that. Americans are tired of getting ripped off. The Federal Trade Commission will be a proud partner in this new effort," FTC spokesman Joe Simonson said. The executive order differed from what drug makers had been expecting. Four lobbyist sources told Reuters they were expecting an executive order that called for "most favoured nation" pricing on a subset of Medicare drugs. "Implementing something like this is pretty challenging. He tried to do this before and it was stopped by the courts," said Evan Seigerman, analyst at BMO Capital Markets. The White House officials did not specify any targets. Trump's order also directs the government to consider facilitating direct-to-consumer purchasing programs that would sell drugs at the prices other countries pay. It also orders the Secretary of Commerce and other agency heads to review and consider actions regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or ingredients that may contribute to price differences. US President Donald Trump has signed a wide-reaching executive order directing drug makers to lower the prices of their medicines to align with what other countries pay that analysts and legal experts say could be difficult to implement. The order gives drug makers price targets in the next 30 days, and will take further action to lower prices if those companies do not make "significant progress" towards those goals within six months of the order being signed. Trump told a press conference that the government would impose tariffs on companies if the prices in the US did not match those in other countries and said he was seeking cuts of between 59 per cent and 90 per cent. "Everybody should equalise. Everybody should pay the same price," Trump said. Investors were sceptical about the order's implementation, and shares -which had been down overnight on the threat of "most favoured nation" pricing - recovered and rose in early morning trade on Monday. The United States pays the highest prices for prescription drugs, often nearly three times more than other developed countries. Trump tried in his first term to bring the United States in line with other countries but was blocked by the courts. Trump's drug pricing proposal comes as the president has sought to fulfil a campaign promise of tackling inflation and lowering prices for a host of everyday items, from eggs to petrol. Trump said his order on drug prices was partly a result of a conversation with an unnamed friend who told the president he got a weight loss injection for $US88 ($A138) in London and that the same injection in the US cost $US1300. If drug makers do not meet the government's expectations, it will use rule making to bring drug prices to international levels and consider a range of other measures, including importing medicines from other developed countries and implementing export restrictions, a copy of the order showed. Trade groups representing biotech and pharmaceutical decried the move. "Importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers. It would mean less treatments and cures and would jeopardise the hundreds of billions our member companies are planning to invest in America," PhRMA CEO Stephen Ubl said in a statement. Ubl said the real reasons for high drug prices are other "countries not paying their fair share and middlemen driving up prices for US patients". The order also directs the US Federal Trade Commission to consider aggressive enforcement against what the government calls anti-competitive practices by drug makers. "We're all familiar with some of the places where pharmaceutical companies push the limits to prevent competition that would lower their prices," one White House official said, pointing to patent protections and deals drug makers make with generic companies to hold off on cheaper copies. The executive order is likely to face legal challenges, particularly for exceeding limits set by US law, including on imports of drugs from abroad, health policy lawyer Paul Kim said. "The order's suggestion of broader or direct-to-consumer importation stretches well beyond what the statute allows," Kim said. The FTC has a long history of antitrust enforcement actions against pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies. "President Donald Trump campaigned on lowering drug costs and today he's doing just that. Americans are tired of getting ripped off. The Federal Trade Commission will be a proud partner in this new effort," FTC spokesman Joe Simonson said. The executive order differed from what drug makers had been expecting. Four lobbyist sources told Reuters they were expecting an executive order that called for "most favoured nation" pricing on a subset of Medicare drugs. "Implementing something like this is pretty challenging. He tried to do this before and it was stopped by the courts," said Evan Seigerman, analyst at BMO Capital Markets. The White House officials did not specify any targets. Trump's order also directs the government to consider facilitating direct-to-consumer purchasing programs that would sell drugs at the prices other countries pay. It also orders the Secretary of Commerce and other agency heads to review and consider actions regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or ingredients that may contribute to price differences.
West Australian
12-05-2025
- Business
- West Australian
Trump order demands US medicine industry cuts prices
US President Donald Trump has signed a wide-reaching executive order directing drug makers to lower the prices of their medicines to align with what other countries pay that analysts and legal experts say could be difficult to implement. The order gives drug makers price targets in the next 30 days, and will take further action to lower prices if those companies do not make "significant progress" towards those goals within six months of the order being signed. Trump told a press conference that the government would impose tariffs on companies if the prices in the US did not match those in other countries and said he was seeking cuts of between 59 per cent and 90 per cent. "Everybody should equalise. Everybody should pay the same price," Trump said. Investors were sceptical about the order's implementation, and shares -which had been down overnight on the threat of "most favoured nation" pricing - recovered and rose in early morning trade on Monday. The United States pays the highest prices for prescription drugs, often nearly three times more than other developed countries. Trump tried in his first term to bring the United States in line with other countries but was blocked by the courts. Trump's drug pricing proposal comes as the president has sought to fulfil a campaign promise of tackling inflation and lowering prices for a host of everyday items, from eggs to petrol. Trump said his order on drug prices was partly a result of a conversation with an unnamed friend who told the president he got a weight loss injection for $US88 ($A138) in London and that the same injection in the US cost $US1300. If drug makers do not meet the government's expectations, it will use rule making to bring drug prices to international levels and consider a range of other measures, including importing medicines from other developed countries and implementing export restrictions, a copy of the order showed. Trade groups representing biotech and pharmaceutical decried the move. "Importing foreign prices from socialist countries would be a bad deal for American patients and workers. It would mean less treatments and cures and would jeopardise the hundreds of billions our member companies are planning to invest in America," PhRMA CEO Stephen Ubl said in a statement. Ubl said the real reasons for high drug prices are other "countries not paying their fair share and middlemen driving up prices for US patients". The order also directs the US Federal Trade Commission to consider aggressive enforcement against what the government calls anti-competitive practices by drug makers. "We're all familiar with some of the places where pharmaceutical companies push the limits to prevent competition that would lower their prices," one White House official said, pointing to patent protections and deals drug makers make with generic companies to hold off on cheaper copies. The executive order is likely to face legal challenges, particularly for exceeding limits set by US law, including on imports of drugs from abroad, health policy lawyer Paul Kim said. "The order's suggestion of broader or direct-to-consumer importation stretches well beyond what the statute allows," Kim said. The FTC has a long history of antitrust enforcement actions against pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies. "President Donald Trump campaigned on lowering drug costs and today he's doing just that. Americans are tired of getting ripped off. The Federal Trade Commission will be a proud partner in this new effort," FTC spokesman Joe Simonson said. The executive order differed from what drug makers had been expecting. Four lobbyist sources told Reuters they were expecting an executive order that called for "most favoured nation" pricing on a subset of Medicare drugs. "Implementing something like this is pretty challenging. He tried to do this before and it was stopped by the courts," said Evan Seigerman, analyst at BMO Capital Markets. The White House officials did not specify any targets. Trump's order also directs the government to consider facilitating direct-to-consumer purchasing programs that would sell drugs at the prices other countries pay. It also orders the Secretary of Commerce and other agency heads to review and consider actions regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or ingredients that may contribute to price differences.
