Although many supporters of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) view having Medicare “negotiate” drug prices as emulating policies in Europe, a recent article in Health Affairs Forefront shows how the IRA’s price setting provisions are more coercive than any European country system and threaten access to medicines for millions of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.
One concerning aspect of the IRA is the penalties that will negatively impact patients. Should a company not participate in the price-setting process, it will be forced to either pay an excise tax that could conceivably exceed its entire company revenue or remove all of its products from coverage under Medicare and Medicaid. That means Americans enrolled in those programs — whether they are taking a medicine selected for price setting or not — would lose access.
As outlined in Health Affairs:
- Collectively, the nine companies that are primary manufacturers of the medicines selected for the first round of price setting manufacture medicines for 28 million patients in Medicare and Medicaid each year.
- In 2021, 8 million Medicare and Medicaid patients received one of the ten medicines selected and another 20 million were treated with other products made by the nine biopharmaceutical manufacturers.
- By government policy design, the vast majority of Medicare and Medicaid enrollees do not have additional health insurance that would pay for these medicines if Medicare and Medicaid did not.
The Health Affairs article looks at drug pricing policies in Germany, France and the United Kingdom and notes that while other countries use drug price setting policies that are deeply flawed and have severe consequences for patient access, they do not threaten to remove coverage for the biopharmaceutical manufacturer’s entire portfolio of medicines in response to government pricing for one medicine, like the IRA does.
The IRA’s price setting provisions not only mark a shift in U.S. policy toward government price-setting but also portend a U.S. government much more willing to deny patients access to innovative treatments. In just the first year, the U.S. government is willing to risk access to medicines for 28 million Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. Even more alarming is that there are some policymakers who want to expand the IRA, putting access at risk for even more Americans. Price setting is the wrong approach. That’s why Congress and the administration need to fix the IRA, putting the focus back on protecting patient access to medicines.
Learn more about how the IRA threatens access to medicines here.
Richard Kane
Richard Kane is deputy vice president of international policy at the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). Richard leads PhRMA’s international market access and data analytics team. He previously worked in the U.S. government as a senior economist in the Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President and as a senior economist in the Bureau of Economic Analysis at the U.S. Department of Commerce. Richard also previously worked at a private consulting firm, Avalere Health, where he helped lead their policy analytics team.
Richard Kane
New poll: 2 in 3 voters prefer a candidate committed to lowering health insurance premiums
What AARP isn’t telling seniors about MFN
Policymakers should improve patient access and reject price controls
CMS proposal could discourage patient-centered innovation
Nearly 1 in 4 patients initially denied access to IRA medicines
Voters continue to voice their concerns on government price controls
Medicare Part D at 20: Building on a strong foundation
Guest Blog: Price controls won’t lower costs when insurers control access
MFN could disrupt the affordable medicines patients depend on
New “America Cures” ad: U.S. patients get new medicines first
Patients speak out: MFN won't address my affordability concerns
MFN price controls threaten American jobs and the U.S. economy
Ahead of ASCO: Cancer innovation is promising, but policy choices matter
State price-setting boards create more questions than answers
New analysis highlights access to new medicines in the United States and abroad
MFN won’t lower costs when insurers call the shots
Guest Blog: How MFN price controls could decide my health care
MFN price controls would drain pensions and put retirements at risk
States should avoid repeating the IRA’s price‑setting mistakes
CMS undermines medical progress with MFN price controls
Trump Administration’s efforts to have other countries pay their fair share are underway
CMS’ MFN proposals won’t help seniors despite lofty promises
Voters voice concerns on government price controls
Virginia should be cautious about importing federal price-setting mechanisms
Policymakers shouldn’t double down on the IRA’s flaws with MFN
MFN drug pricing risks reviving a harmful metric the U.S. rejected
Leadership in biopharmaceutical R&D provides U.S. patients the greatest access to innovative medicines
Harmful U.S. policies will help drive China’s global leadership in biopharmaceutical innovation
MFN undermines U.S. biopharmaceutical innovation
CMS puts patients and innovation at risk with MFN
New list of selected drugs highlights growing consequences of government price setting
Price setting policies put cancer gains in jeopardy
Myth vs. Fact: How government price setting impacts innovation
The IRA’s price setting doesn’t guarantee lower costs or better access
PhRMA calls on USTR to ensure foreign nations pay their fair share
What seniors can expect this open enrollment
Part D premiums are going up, while choices are going down
Why states struggle to deliver savings: Middlemen and 340B siphon dollars from patients and states
Celebrating 60 Years of Medicare
Medicare patients face higher drug costs, despite IRA promises
CMS continues to make a bad law worse
ICYMI: Forget Foreign Price Controls: There’s a better solution to lowering drug prices
Americans are paying a 26% freerider tax on medicines because other countries don’t pay their fair share
New “Balance the Scales” campaign highlights why Americans pay more for prescription medicines
Foreign first pricing schemes don’t address why Americans pay more
New analysis: Fewer treatments and cures under the IRA’s pill penalty
How the IRA is impacting the generic drug market
Three reasons Congress should fix the IRA’s pill penalty
Improved treatments continue to lead to declining cancer mortality rates in the U.S.
Virginia, Don't Let Politicians Take Away Your Medicine
Patients are losing as government price setting continues
PhRMA CEOs Tee Up Next Week's Health Care Conference
Post-approval R&D is critical for fighting cancer. The IRA makes it more difficult.
CMS needs to do better
Is CMS paying attention to the growing access barriers for Medicare patients under the IRA?
7 reasons why states shouldn’t copy the IRA’s price setting mistake
Did the administration consider the importance of blood cancer medicines to patients in price setting process?
Did the administration consider the importance of blood clot medicines to patients in the price setting process?
Three ways state drug price setting boards fail patients
The Inflation Reduction Act could increase costs and reduce access for millions of seniors
Are the IRA’s Part B inflation rebates lowering costs for Medicare patients? No.
Did the administration consider the importance of autoimmune disease medicines to patients in price setting process?
Did the administration consider the value of innovative diabetes medicines in price setting process?
New survey: Insurers confirm IRA will reduce patient treatment options
The unintended consequences of government price setting in Medicare Part D
Don’t put the government between patients and their medicines
Biosimilars continue to drive market competition and increase savings for seniors
What is the low-income subsidy program and how is it changing?
Case study: How seniors could face access disruptions because of the IRA’s price setting provisions
PhRMA reiterates concerns with IRA price setting program, urges CMS to mitigate harm
More than 60 researchers advocate on Capitol Hill
The IRA could lead to higher out-of-pocket costs for 3.5 million Medicare patients in 2026
ICYMI: Health care policy should be driven by patients, not politics
ICYMI: Misaligned policies undermine patient access
ICYMI: Innovation transforms lives but misguided federal policies threaten patient outcomes
Mental Health Awareness Month: Supporting loved ones and improving mental health in America
How government price setting fails to address systemic health care inequities
Government price-setting boards: Why Minnesota needs to take a better approach
IRA is already negatively impacting access to medicines in Part D
Government price setting won’t help patients in Illinois
New analysis: Flawed assessments of a medicine’s value jeopardize patient access
3 Takeaways from POLITICO’s Health Care Summit
ICYMI: More evidence of the IRA’s harmful consequences on post-approval research and development
Colorado is proof: Too many unanswered questions remain about state government price setting's impact on patients and providers
Watch: A conversation with Dr. Mike Ybarra on Rare Disease Day
American Heart Month: A nurse’s perspective
The truth about Nebraska's price setting push
As the administration continues to falsely claim Medicare “negotiation,” keep these points in mind
Powering the next generation of therapies: A conversation with Astellas US President Mark Reisenauer
Biosimilars drive savings, but the IRA undermines their development
New analysis of patient access restrictions in the United Kingdom
The IRA’s pill penalty threatens the future of oncology R&D
Don't close the door on rare disease research
ICYMI: 3 takeaways on the IRA’s unintended consequences from America’s Physician Groups’ 2023 annual fall conference
R&D leaders to Biden Administration: Your policies are undermining the Cancer Moonshot
Three things economists are saying about the Inflation Reduction Act
4 truths about state government price setting
IRA threatens seniors’ access to robust treatment options
Correcting the record: IRA’s government price setting provisions are unconstitutional
IRA changes to Part D risk access to medicines
Three concerns about Colorado's approach to government price setting
With the first list of medicines out, let’s not forget why government price setting is bad policy
Michigan proposal jeopardizes access to medicines
One year later IRAs unintended consequences are becoming reality
AARP’s latest misleading report
New report shows high-impact R&D happens after cancer medicines are first approved
More than 60 researchers ask Congress to support innovation
New report shows how the Inflation Reduction Act stifles innovation for small molecule medicines
ASCO 2023: Protecting our progress in the fight against cancer
Highlights from ASCO 2023
Four things for CMS to keep in mind as they implement changes to Part D
Addressing Mental Health: A conversation with Barry Greene, CEO of Sage Therapeutics
Mental Health Awareness Month: Fighting the growing mental health crisis and supporting innovation
Support for continued progress is critical for pediatric drug development
New resource underscores the importance of small molecule medicines
CMS guidance on IRA price setting process doubles down on bad policy
New global analysis shows patient access challenges around the world
ICYMI: PhRMA President and CEO Stephen J. Ubl discusses patient affordability
New Report: More than 400 medicines in development for leading chronic conditions affecting older Americans
Celebrating the success of the COVID-19 vaccines, and looking to the future
IRA Impacts: Cancer treatment research and development
Celebrating 40 years of the Orphan Drug Act on Rare Disease Day
WTAS: Inflation Reduction Act already impacting R&D decisions
ICYMI: PhRMA COO Lori Reilly speaks about the health care agenda for the next Congress
New government price setting policy threatens post-approval research
Rejecting ICER’s bad advice
New survey: Voters seriously concerned about fine print in reconciliation bill
This week’s reading list: All the reasons the Senate-passed drug pricing bill is bad policy
Myth vs. Fact: The Senate’s latest price setting proposal
An open letter to Congress: Stand with patients and future cures
ICYMI: Patients across the country are sharing concerns about government price setting
The Senate’s latest price setting proposal will undermine U.S. economic growth
Celebrating Medicare’s 57th anniversary
New analysis finds deeper impact of drug pricing bill on biopharmaceutical researchers
ICYMI: A patient, physician, biotech investor and industry leaders warn about the dangers of government price setting bill
The Senate’s latest price setting proposal will undermine: Our health care system
The Senate’s latest price setting proposal will undermine: American medical innovation
The Senate’s latest price setting proposal will undermine: Patient access to medicines
The Patient Perspective: Government price-setting harms patients
Polling continues to show voters reject so-called Medicare “negotiation” once they learn about consequences for patients
By the Numbers: Patients lose when the government sets prices
Guest Post: If we truly want to cure complex diseases, politicians should reject price setting
Veterans Affairs 101: Three charts show how the VA system differs from Medicare
Government price setting leaves behind families counting on new medicines
Government price setting won’t stop insurers from shifting costs to patients
It’s a new year, but sadly Congress is still pursuing flawed price setting policies
A price control by any other name would still put patients at risk and threaten innovation
Guest post: Congress should not put future innovation at risk
What is missing in the current drug pricing plan
In the current health care debate, Congress has lost sight of what matters to U.S. voters
What they are saying: Government price setting for medicines is not the answer
ICYMI: New study confirms policies like H.R. 3 could significantly reduce drug development
Five reasons tying VA prices to Medicare Part D misses the mark
H.R. 3 threatens access to medicines, future innovation and American jobs
How the IRA is more coercive than any European government price setting scheme
Government Price Setting
How the IRA is more coercive than any European government price setting scheme
How the IRA is more coercive than any European government price setting scheme