Perhaps according to Politico:
Earlier next week, Trump is expected to sign an executive order to pursue an initiative called “Most Elde Nation” for the selection of drugs within the Medicare program. This idea will be used by administration officials to force prices …
White House officials initially pressurize the Republican of the Congress to draft a “favorite nation” provision in its megabil, which pays countries developed at low prices to the cost of drugs in Medicids.
Many countries use reference pricing (see my blog post here). However, as I have written in the past, America’s cost savings are likely to be much less than many policy makers.
More especially, my USC colleagues Daryas Lakdavalla and Dana Goldman argue that the ‘most preferred nation’ section will be problematic to apply in behavior for three reasons:
1. It is easily readyInstead of lowering US prices, pharmaceutical companies and their foreign customers can agree to confidential discounts and create high prices abroad – already common abroad – which produce equal chronic low net prices. The US government may try to force pharmaceutical companies to disclose their exemption, but it will move away from foreign laws required for privacy.
2. It cannot undo the basic economics of the global drug marketplace. Our research at the USC Shefer Center reveals about 70% of global drug benefits from the US market. Facing an option amidst deep cuts in our US pricing or loss of weak profitable foreign markets, we can expect many firms to get out of foreign markets on their initial occasion, American consumers leave the drug manufacturers with low profits and generations coming with low innovation. In short, everyone loses.
3. It makes pricing decisions to foreign governments. Our Western colleagues have not shared ideas about giving us importance to new drugs. For intelligence, the British National Health Service has long been considered as low health reforms as one third, even one third of the value of conservative American assessment. And other developed countries have shown enough desire to deny access to all their consumers, if they are offered a value that they feel that the value fails to represent the value, according to its artificially low concepts.
Joshua p. A Forbes article by Cohen also noted that most of the favorite nation policies could be blocked by courts to violate the commerce segment. What is commerce clause and how will international reference pricing (potentially) violate this section? As I am not a legal scholar, I surprise to offer an answer:
Commerce Claus (Article I, Section 8, section 3 of the US Constitution 3) “gives Congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations and give special power with many states and with Indian tribes.” It prevents states or federal agencies from implementing policies that effectively control trade or prices beyond the US boundaries unless the Congress has clearly authorized them to do so.
Tie American pharmaceutical reimbursement rates for prices set by foreign governments, in other words, adopting an international context and importing foreign price control in the American law and extraorite pressure on foreign markets. Because such a policy will regulate commerce with other countries without new laws, it risks to highlight the only authority of the Congress under the Commerce Section and can be killed as unconstitutional.
Cloud and Chatgpt Note that the Congress has widespread rights under the commerce segment to regulate interstate commerce, including pharmaceuticals, the most preferred nation policy for pharmaceuticals can remove these objections, especially if the medicare or federal purchasing programs are structured for strict fall within the program or federal purchasing programs.
Stay to see how one of the most preferred nation policy is implemented in the US next week.
