Pharma tariffs and what's next

I spent a week reading Federal Register comments

On April 2, the Trump administration announced sweeping tariffs on nearly every country on earth, calling it Liberation Day. Notably exempt from these tariffs, though, were pharmaceutical products. Trump signaled his intentions to add tariffs to pharmaceuticals but held off.

That same month, the Department of Commerce opened an investigation into the national security implications of existing pharmaceutical supply chains under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. This statute allows the administration to adjust imports if the current landscape is deemed a national security threat — broad language, and the administration has used it broadly.

The order specified that the agency was investigating all aspects of pharma products, including active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), which are the precursor compounds for drugs, as well as pharmaceuticals in general.

As part of its investigation, the Department of Commerce requested comment from interested parties. Anyone could leave a comment. Perhaps here I should note that I love to read comments on stuff like this. It’s the more lawyerly version of reading Facebook comments; people are dramatic and it surfaces unexpected areas of interest.

(One comment on this order, for example, was mostly just a person complaining about their health: “I went up for [sic] pants sizes, severe fatigue, I was cold, etc.. Not long after these symptoms started, I began having waves of heat across my body, no, not menopause.” I sincerely hope this person feels better soon, but it’s basically the same as reading Facebook. Anyway.)

A few areas of agreement emerged from the comments submitted by pharma companies.

Generic vs. brand name

Generic and brand name manufacturers had slightly different reactions to the request for comment.