
Frustrated with continued high drug costs, Trump demands 17 companies lower prices in 60 days
Trump sent letters to 17 major pharmaceutical company CEOs on Thursday with a list of demands, including that the manufacturers extend so-called 'Most Favored Nation' pricing — the lowest price paid for a drug in a peer country — to all drugs provided to Medicaid enrollees. He also wants the companies to guarantee that Medicaid, Medicare and commercial-market insurers pay such prices for all new drugs. The president gave the companies 60 days to comply.
The directive stems from an executive order Trump signed in May, when he demanded drugmakers start offering US patients those lower prices or face consequences. Prices for some brand name drugs in the US are more than three times those in other developed nations, according to the administration.
In that executive order, he also directed the Department of Health and Human Services to come up with price targets within 30 days. But Trump implied that the discussions between HHS officials and the companies did not yield acceptable results.
'Most proposals my administration has received to 'resolve' this critical issue promised more of the same: shifting blame and requesting policy changes that would result in billions of dollars in handouts to industry,' he wrote in the letters, which were posted on Truth Social. 'Moving forward, the only thing I will accept from drug manufacturers is a commitment that provides American families immediate relief from the vastly inflated drug prices and an end to the free ride of American innovation by European and other developed nations.'
'But if you refuse to step up, we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices,' he continued. 'Americans are demanding lower drug prices, and they need them today.'
The May executive order outlined some potential ramifications if manufacturers do not make significant progress in lowering prices. Those included directing HHS to craft a rule implementing the policy, allowing more drug importation into the US, reviewing drug exports, and having the Food and Drug Administration modify or revoke approvals granted for drugs that may be 'unsafe, ineffective, or improperly marketed.'
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the industry's main trade association, did not immediately return a request for comment. The stock prices for several of the companies that received the letters, including Eli Lilly, Merck, Johnson & Johnson, GSK and Amgen, slipped between 1% to 4% in mid-afternoon trading. The S&P 500 Pharmaceuticals Industry Index was down a little more than 2%.
It's unclear what authority the president has to demand certain prices, particularly in the private market and without Congress' involvement. Some industry experts have described the May executive order as more bark than bite.
Trump's effort to establish a 'Most Favored Nation' rule for certain drugs in Medicare during his first term was quickly blocked by federal courts for procedural reasons before being rescinded by then-President Joe Biden in 2021. The May executive order goes far beyond that measure since it is not limited to drugs purchased by Medicare nor to a certain number of pharmaceuticals.
In the letters, Trump also demanded that drug companies return revenue from operations abroad to lower prices in America through 'an explicit agreement with the United States.' Plus, he ordered the manufacturers to participate in programs to sell certain drugs directly to consumers or business at 'Most Favored Nation' prices.
Drugmakers have long complained that foreign governments, which are more involved in price setting, demand very low prices to gain access to their markets.
It's not the only way the Trump administration is squeezing drugmakers — officials have also looked to impose tariffs on pharmaceutical imports, which had been exempted from such levies enacted during the president's first term. The tariffs could exacerbate shortages of certain drugs, particularly generic medicines, and eventually raise prices, experts have warned.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
James Cook sits out Bills' practice Sunday, calls it "business"
Bills running back James Cook has made it known he wants a contract extension, and he skipped the team's voluntary offseason workouts to express his displeasure at not having one. Cook, though, attended the mandatory minicamp and fully participated in the first eight practices of training camp. On Sunday, he rested. Cook did not participate in practice for the first time during camp, watching from the side in street clothes and spending time on an exercise bicycle. "Oh, nothing," Cook said, via Alaina Getzenberg of ESPN. "Business." Cook also answered "business" when asked whether he was holding in and about whether he planned to practice Monday. The Bills had no comment on Cook's non-participation, per Getzenberg, and Cook was not included in coach Sean McDermott's list of injured players sitting out Sunday's session. Tom Pelissero of NFL Media reports that the sides have engaged in talks and are "not . . . that far apart." Cook wants to be paid like one of the top running backs in the league after making $4.257 million for his first three seasons. He is due to make $5.271 million in base salary this season in the final year of his rookie deal. Cook, a second-round pick in 2022, has rushed for 2,638 yards and 20 touchdowns in his career. The two-time Pro Bowler also has caught 97 passes for 883 yards with seven touchdowns. The Bills extended the contracts of cornerback Christian Benford, defensive end Greg Rousseau, linebacker Terrel Bernard and wide receiver Khalil Shakir this offseason. Cook insinuated on social media early in the offseason that he was looking for $15 million a season, something that is unlikely with any team. Saquon Barkley ($20.6 million per season), Christian McCaffrey ($19 million) and Derrick Henry ($15 million) are the only running backs making at least that much per season.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
James Cook sits out Bills practice for first time amid contract stalemate, cites 'business'
The James Cook hold-in has commenced. After participating at practice since the start of Bills training camp, Buffalo's Pro Bowl running back showed up to Sunday's session in street clothes. When asked by reporters why he didn't participate, Cook offered a one-word answer: "Business," Cook said. When asked about practicing on Monday, Cook offered the same answer: "Business." Per ESPN's Alaina Getzenberg, Cook kept repeating the word "business" to reporters from there. The Bills declined to comment on the situation, according to Getzenberg. So it's safe to say that Cook's lack of participation was business-related. Cook shows up to practice in sweats Cook's been seeking a new deal the entire offseason. Despite the lack of progress on an extension, he participated at mandatory minicamp and during the opening days of training camp practice. But it was clear from the start of Sunday's session that he wasn't participating when he showed up wearing white sweats, no pads and a beanie. Instead of running drills, Cook got his work done Sunday on a sideline exercise bike. Cook, 25, is approaching the final season of his four-year, $5.8 million rookie contract that he signed after the Bills selected him in the second round of the 2022 draft. He's made the Pro Bowl twice while posting 1,200-plus yards from scrimmage in each of the last two seasons. He led the NFL with 16 rushing touchdowns in 2024. He's done so for a Bills team that enters 2025 seeking its sixth straight AFC East championship and hoping to contend for the Super Bowl. Where things stand between Cook, Bills Cook's previously indicated on social media that he's seeking a contract valued at $15 million per season. That would make him the league's third-highest paid running back in terms of annual value behind Saquon Barkley and Christian McCaffrey. Per Over The Cap, his current average annual contract value of $1.46 million makes him the league's 51st-highest paid running back. Cook addressed his contract status on July 24, shortly after the start of training camp. 'I mean, we have talks. I'm never going to give up,' Cook said of negotiations with the Bills, per The Athletic. 'I mean, I deserve it — what I want, what I need. It's going to eventually happen.' When asked how confident he was in a deal getting done, Cook said this: 'I mean, however it happens, it's going to get done," Cook said. "Wherever it happens." That same day, Bills general manager Brandon Beane addressed Cook's contract situation. 'As I've said all along, I love James Cook," Beane told reporters. "I want nothing more — you know how I am, I want to draft, develop, re-sign our own. "It is a business. We have to fit it in, not only cash, but cap. And sometimes it's not — you can look at it and say, well, you go this website or whatever, they could fit him in if they did this and this. But we also have to look at '26, '27, and beyond because you can walk yourself into one of those years where you're like, oh man, there's not a lot of guys we can take down on those years. "We would have to trade or cut someone that we wouldn't want to lose. So, it's not only 2025 when we're doing a deal with him or any other player. So, all those things have to make sense for us to fit it in." Without a contract extension, Cook would enter next offseason as a free agent, though the Bills in that instance could opt to apply the franchise tag. But that's not the immediate concern in Buffalo. For now, the Bills are trying to win a Super Bowl. And the status of their Pro Bowl running back is up in the air as Buffalo approaches its third week of training camp.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Man Refuses to Pay Girlfriend's $9K Credit Card Debt, but She Says He Needs to 'Invest' in Their Relationship
A 30-year-old man is seeking advice on whether or not he made the right choice to set a boundaryNEED TO KNOW A 30-year-old man is seeking advice on whether or not he made the right choice to set a boundary His girlfriend asked him for $300 to $500 a month to help pay off her credit card debt he didn't know she had The man refused and now his girlfriend is acting "cold" toward himA man is at odds with his girlfriend after she asked him to pay off some of her credit card debt. The 30-year-old man sought advice from Reddit on whether he had made the right decision by telling his 28-year-old girlfriend that he wouldn't share the burden of her debt. "So we've been together almost three years. Things have been good overall," he begins. "We've talked a lot about the future and were planning to move in together soon like actively browsing apartments kind of soon." However, last week, she told him that she had "around $9,000 in credit card debt," which he never knew about. "I asked why she didn't mention it earlier and she said it was embarrassing and she thought she could get a handle on it before it became our problem," he explains. Then, his girlfriend told him that she wanted to "delay" moving in together unless he was willing to help her pay off the debt. She proposed that he could cover $300 to $500 a month to help "speed things up," but he told her he "wasn't comfortable with that." 'I don't have any debt. I worked hard to stay that way. I've had my own money struggles, so I've always been careful with spending," he explains. "And while I don't mind helping out here and there in a relationship, I don't think it's fair to expect me to take on someone else's financial mess, especially before we even live together." His girlfriend didn't see it that way and told him he was being 'unsupportive' and that if he "really saw a future with her," he'd be "willing to invest" in it. "But to me that's not what this is. It feels more like I'm being asked to bail her out and I'm just not okay with that," he adds. While the man remained firm and refused to give her the money, now things are 'awkward." "She's barely texting back and when we talk, she's cold. I feel like I'm being punished for setting a boundary," he concludes. "But I also don't want to start living together on the wrong foot feeling like I'm financially responsible for her past choices." People in the comments section of his post told him that he was making the right move by not giving her the money. 'This is a problem she created. You are not her checkbook,' one person commented. 'Run, dude! Any partner who hides their debt, then tries to guilt you into paying it, then gaslights you when you say no is not the person to build a life with,' another person wrote. Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword