Pharma — big and small — braces for Trump tariffs
State of play: Jolley's in Salt Lake City is one of the smaller, independent pharmacies trying to preempt price hikes, NPR reported this week.
The big picture: Trump's announcement of 10% global tariffs on April 2 already had big implications for drug costs like packaging and raw materials, which had been duty-free.
Now the industry is waiting to learn whether he makes good on his promise to impose "major" tariffs on imported medicine.
Case in point: SLC pharmacist Benjamin Jolley bought six months' worth of empty bottles in the most expensive sizes, hoping to get ahead of higher packaging costs.
If Trump defects from the 1995 agreement under which most countries buy and sell medicines without tariffs, the drugs themselves will also get more expensive, Jolley said.
What they're saying:"I understand the rationale for tariffs. I'm not sure that we're gonna do it the right way," Jolley told NPR. "And I am definitely sure that it's going to raise the price that I pay my suppliers."
Zoom out: Pharmaceutical imports from Europe have soared this spring as U.S. pharmacies and manufacturers anticipate supply chain disruptions and drug shortages.
Imports from Ireland, a manufacturing hub for pharma giants like Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson, not only hit a record in March, but were double the previous high, Axios' Tina Reed reports.
Imports from Denmark — home of Novo Nordisk, which makes Ozempic and Wegovy as well as much of the U.S. insulin supply — swelled to $1.2 billion in March, up from $810 million a year ago. That's also up from $825 million in February.
The latest: Trump issued an executive order this week threatening "aggressive additional action" against drug companies that keep selling drugs to U.S. patients at higher prices than are paid in other countries.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Investing in Freightways Group (NZSE:FRW) five years ago would have delivered you a 88% gain
When we invest, we're generally looking for stocks that outperform the market average. Buying under-rated businesses is one path to excess returns. For example, the Freightways Group Limited (NZSE:FRW) share price is up 56% in the last 5 years, clearly besting the market decline of around 6.3% (ignoring dividends). On the other hand, the more recent gains haven't been so impressive, with shareholders gaining just 29%, including dividends. So let's investigate and see if the longer term performance of the company has been in line with the underlying business' progress. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. To paraphrase Benjamin Graham: Over the short term the market is a voting machine, but over the long term it's a weighing machine. One imperfect but simple way to consider how the market perception of a company has shifted is to compare the change in the earnings per share (EPS) with the share price movement. During five years of share price growth, Freightways Group achieved compound earnings per share (EPS) growth of 1.8% per year. This EPS growth is slower than the share price growth of 9% per year, over the same period. So it's fair to assume the market has a higher opinion of the business than it did five years ago. That's not necessarily surprising considering the five-year track record of earnings growth. You can see below how EPS has changed over time (discover the exact values by clicking on the image). Dive deeper into Freightways Group's key metrics by checking this interactive graph of Freightways Group's earnings, revenue and cash flow. What About Dividends? It is important to consider the total shareholder return, as well as the share price return, for any given stock. Whereas the share price return only reflects the change in the share price, the TSR includes the value of dividends (assuming they were reinvested) and the benefit of any discounted capital raising or spin-off. Arguably, the TSR gives a more comprehensive picture of the return generated by a stock. In the case of Freightways Group, it has a TSR of 88% for the last 5 years. That exceeds its share price return that we previously mentioned. The dividends paid by the company have thusly boosted the total shareholder return. A Different Perspective We're pleased to report that Freightways Group shareholders have received a total shareholder return of 29% over one year. And that does include the dividend. That's better than the annualised return of 13% over half a decade, implying that the company is doing better recently. Given the share price momentum remains strong, it might be worth taking a closer look at the stock, lest you miss an opportunity. I find it very interesting to look at share price over the long term as a proxy for business performance. But to truly gain insight, we need to consider other information, too. Case in point: We've spotted 2 warning signs for Freightways Group you should be aware of. We will like Freightways Group better if we see some big insider buys. While we wait, check out this free list of undervalued stocks (mostly small caps) with considerable, recent, insider buying. Please note, the market returns quoted in this article reflect the market weighted average returns of stocks that currently trade on New Zealander exchanges. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Largest National Org Of OB-GYNs Cuts Financial Ties With Trump Admin
The country's largest organization of OB-GYN providers announced this week that it will stop accepting funds from the federal government. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which has more than 60,000 members nationwide, will reject federal funding for all programs and contracts in response to the Trump administration's policies, Axios reported Friday. ACOG appears to be the first nationwide physician organization to cut ties with the Trump administration since President Donald Trump enacted his large-scale campaign to slash all federal initiatives for diversity, equity and inclusion. The national organization states on its website that diversity, equity and inclusion are part of the group's core values, which are integral to combating racism and oppression in medical care. The organization declined to expand on how this funding cut will impact its services but reiterated that ACOG remains committed to quality patient care and improving health outcomes. 'After careful deliberation, ACOG has made an organization-wide decision to stop accepting federal funding for all ACOG programs and activities for current contracts,' ACOG said in a statement to HuffPost on Friday. 'Recent changes in federal funding laws and regulations significantly impact ACOG's program goals, policy positions, and ability to provide timely and evidence-based guidance and recommendations for care.' The organization said it will continue to work with the Trump administration on policymaking decisions and advocating for OB-GYNs. 'We will evaluate opportunities to partner with the government in the future where our program goals align,' the statement reads. In response, White House spokesperson Harrison Fields told HuffPost on Friday afternoon: 'Protecting the civil rights and expanding opportunities for all Americans is a key priority of the Trump administration, which is why he took decisive actions to terminate unlawful DEI preferences in the federal government.' The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to HuffPost's request for comment. ACOG has been at odds with Trump since his conservative Supreme Court repealed federal abortion protections. The fall of Roe v. Wade created a domino effect of state abortion bans that put pregnant people's lives in danger and threatened to criminalize reproductive health providers.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit.
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's extensive tariffs have already started to generate a significant amount of money for the federal government, a new source of revenue for a heavily indebted nation that American policymakers may start to rely on. As part of his quest to reorder the global trading system, Trump has imposed steep tariffs on America's trading partners, with the bulk of those set to go into effect Thursday. Even before the latest tariffs kick in, revenue from taxes collected on imported goods has grown dramatically so far this year. Customs duties, along with some excise taxes, generated $152 billion through July, roughly double the $78 billion netted over the same time period last fiscal year, according to Treasury data. Indeed, Trump has routinely cited the tariff revenue as evidence that his trade approach, which has sown uncertainty and begun to increase prices for consumers, is a win for the United States. Members of his administration have argued that the money from the tariffs would help plug the hole created by the broad tax cuts Congress passed last month, which are expected to cost the government at least $3.4 trillion. 'The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!' Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. 'I think this is addictive,' said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are.' Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. 'Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways,' said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'But it's really a political question.' Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. 'Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place,' Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. 'That's a hefty chunk of change,' Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. 'The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'' Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. 'This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. 'And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025
