Skip to Main Content
Contribute Try STAT+ Today

WASHINGTON —The drug industry’s storied lobbying group isn’t accustomed to bad news — and with its small army of well-connected advocates, it’s even less familiar with surprises.

For PhRMA, the news last winter was both.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT+ and enjoy your first 30 days free!


What is it?

STAT+ is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • STAT+ Conversations
  • Weekly opportunities to engage with our reporters and leading industry experts in live video conversations
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.
  • Blaming Pharma for high prices is not 100% correct. The PBM industry with their deceptive practices need to be reviewed and close oversight initiated. Their mandated rebates to PhARMA should be eliminated and then PhARMA could lower their pricing by 40% without affecting PhARMAs bottom line. PBMs power must be controlled.

  • I’m very excited to hear this, as yes I’d expected Pharma to succeed. The details you recount — and which I had no idea about though I was aware of the measure — are fascinating. This makes me so happy! (tentatively, as you note, what happens in the future in uncertain)

    Great to see them stymied for once! Thanks for this fantastic coverage.

  • How much income do drug companies receive each year due to Part D drug spending? Knowing that would put the $12 billion decrease into perspective.

  • It seems that drug companies could reduce the amount of money they have to pay by pricing the drugs lower and taking less profit. It even seems cheaper that way for them.

    • Agree with Rob. Reducing the price actually lengthens how long they have to pay the discount in the donut hole for beneficiaries on their drug that end up there. For very expensive drugs that get a beneficiary into the catastrophic phase very quickly, the discount is actually relatively modest (they are only required to provide the discount for a distinct phase, not for the entire cost of the drug). I think the policy will lead to more drug price inflation, not less. The only way to tamp down on that perverse incentive in my opinion is to require manufacturer discounts in the catastrophic phase.

Comments are closed.