In June 2022, President Biden announced the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity (APEP) with eleven other countries in the Western Hemisphere. The White House declared APEP a “historic new agreement to drive our hemisphere’s economy recovery and growth,” including through strengthening supply chains, incentivizing private-sector investment and addressing regulatory issues to make regional trade more resilient.
More than two years later, on June 20, 2024, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) finally requested input from the U.S. business community and other public stakeholders concerning U.S. interests and priorities regarding APEP.
As PhRMA notes in its recent comment letter, USTR’s intentionally unambitious and vague APEP strategy has failed to deliver meaningful results for American workers and businesses. USTR’s list of priorities for APEP indefensibly excludes longstanding and bipartisan U.S. trade objectives — such as protecting intellectual property and actively dismantling foreign trade barriers — that protect American workers from unfair competition abroad.
As PhRMA’s comments explain, these and other trade objectives, such as eliminating regulatory barriers that impede U.S. biopharmaceutical exports, are essential to:
- Expand export and economic opportunities for American workers and companies
- Incentivize the invention and production of lifesaving medicines, and
- Reinforce the resilience of U.S. biopharmaceutical supply chains in the Western Hemisphere.
Unfortunately, USTR’s lack of serious purpose concerning APEP is merely the latest example of the Administration’s misguided and often harmful approach to trade policy, which holds negative consequences for American workers and U.S. businesses facing stiff global competition.
Douglas Petersen
Douglas Petersen is PhRMA’s Vice President for international trade. Previously, he was international trade counsel for the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, an international trade attorney with White & Case LLP and a trade policy analyst at the Cato Institute. He received a law degree from New York University, a graduate degree from the London School of Economics, and undergraduate degrees from the University of Utah.
Douglas Petersen
PhRMA highlights need for Germany to pay its fair share
New “America Cures” ad: U.S. patients get new medicines first
New analysis highlights access to new medicines in the United States and abroad
USTR’s 2026 Special 301 Report stands up for American innovation
Trump Administration’s efforts to have other countries pay their fair share are underway
Argentina sets course to enable innovation by rejecting failed patent rules
Hospitals drive nearly 80% of the U.S. health spending gap
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
The Special 301 Report is foundational to USTR’s trade policy agenda
PhRMA calls on USTR to ensure foreign nations pay their fair share
Tariffs on medicines would harm American competitiveness, industry and patients
USTR 2025 Special 301 Report corrects course
Strong Trade Policies Protect American Workers and Biopharmaceutical Innovation
USTR remembers—three years later—that it announced a trade initiative with Europe
PhRMA submission calls for USTR to correct course on trade policy, enforcement
World Trade Week 2024: Time for a more ambitious U.S. trade agenda
Why won’t USTR strengthen medical supply chains with America’s allies?
International meetings hold big implications for Americans and our innovation ecosystem
PhRMA 2024 Special 301 submission: USTR needs to support American innovation, global access to medicines
Biden Administration’s Indo Pacific trade dialogue is a missed opportunity to bolster American exports, innovation
New analysis of patient access restrictions in the United Kingdom
PhRMA submission: USTR needs more ambition to combat unfair trade barriers
The Biden Administration has failed to advance an inclusive, worker-centered trade agenda
Four ways that America’s biopharmaceutical industry supports jobs and fuels economic growth
U.S. biopharmaceutical exports support jobs, innovation
Will the administration capitalize on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework to drive medical innovation?
Biden administration should prioritize innovation in U.S.-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade
PhRMA submission to USTR calls for urgent defense of American innovation abroad
Partnerships are driving global COVID-19 treatment access
The dangers of expanding the TRIPS waiver
Biden Administration details inadequate protection of American intellectual property and foreign barriers to innovation abroad
PhRMA encourages Biden administration to pursue ambitious Indo-Pacific Economic Framework
PhRMA submission to 2022 National Trade Estimate Report underscores need for pro-innovation U.S. trade policy to combat COVID-19
Strengthening the WTOs global trade and health agenda
New polling shows Americans are sounding the alarm on the TRIPS IP waiver
The Biden Administration allows politics to upend a pragmatic pandemic response
American leadership on innovation policy is essential to global health progress
Preserving U.S. innovation worldwide is more important than ever
U.S. trade policy must prioritize American biopharmaceutical innovation and patient access
The continued imperative to protect U.S. innovation worldwide
Trump administration must defend and protect U.S. innovation
PhRMA submission to 2020 National Trade Estimate Report: Urgent action required to protect U.S. biopharmaceutical innovation
Setting the record straight on international reference pricing
World Trade Month: How we can expand world-class pro-innovation standards
Special 301 submission calls for a level playing field for American innovators
Fact Check: Biologics, regulatory data protection and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement
PhRMA submission to the 2019 National Trade Estimate Report urges action to protect U.S. biopharmaceutical innovation
PhRMA submission to HHS on blueprint to lower drug prices and reduce out-of-pocket costs
To continue to drive the innovation economy and exports, American biopharmaceutical sector depends on fair trade agreements
Poll respondents appreciate economic benefits of innovation and call for more protections
As U.S. looks to modernize NAFTA, strong enforcement of existing obligations should be a top priority
Foreign government price setting by any name harms innovation and access to medicines
Compulsory licensing: A misused and abused international trade law
Government-imposed price controls threaten innovation and access
ICYMI: Ubl weighs in on how fair trade protects US biopharmaceutical innovation
Illegal trade barriers discriminate against U.S. innovators
Trading fair means upholding the law: A focus on patents
Enforcing unmet trade obligations protects U.S. innovation
NAFTA tribunal fails to rule on Canada’s patent utility doctrine
PhRMA urges USTR to protect American innovators abroad
No Region Left Behind: USTR expands its unambitious trade agenda to the western hemisphere
International
Trade
No Region Left Behind: USTR expands its unambitious trade agenda to the western hemisphere
No Region Left Behind: USTR expands its unambitious trade agenda to the western hemisphere