Of course, it could be that the company has assessed (likely correctly) that very little legislation will pass in this fractured, partisan environment. [OTOH, Pfizer has filed no strike suit against US health agencies, in contrast to Merck's / Mr. Davis' choice to do so -- in what is now widely regarded as largely a bit of MAGA/GOP infused political grand-standing.]
So -- the lower spending may be transitory here -- if Democrats recapture all chambers and keep 1600 Penn., in 2024. We shall see -- but Pfizer's categories of ear-bending involve the following:
. . .Drug Pricing, Support of Biosimilars, Out-of-Pocket Costs, Rebate Reform, Vaccine Infrastructure/Excise Tax, PDUFA, Pandemic Preparedness/PAHPA. . . .
Medicare Part D, Rebate Reform- PBMs, Out-Of-Pocket Costs, Government negotiation on Medicare, Antimicrobial Resistance, March-In. . . .
Comprehensive Corporate Tax Reform, International Tax Reform, OECD Profit Allocation, U.S. Manufacturing Credits, Build Back Better Act, Minimum Tax. . . .
International Supply Chain/Buy America; Harmonize International Drug Manufacturing Standards; Global Access to Medicines; Foreign Market Access Issues (including IPR). . . and
TRIPS Waiver, Bayh-Dole March-in-Rights, General IP Issues. . . .
Now you know. . . but do note that Pfizer is lobbying on negotiating with Medicare, rather than litigating about it. Grin. . . . G'night.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment