Merck, for its part, claims that the problem stems from HHS and CMS forcing it to "speak" -- when it would rather. . . not.
That seems a lil'. . . too cute. It would actually RATHER just keep selling Januvia® to CMS and HHS and the VA at high prices. It is not required to speak, or sell, at any price -- let alone the one the government asks most ardently for (as these ongoing negotiations make plain). It remains free to "not speak" -- by not selling -- if it feels the price is unfair.
But as we've long said, the company seems to only half-believe its own arguments here -- and keeps participating. So -- I'll quote the government letter below:
. . .[T]he court reached the merits of the due process claim and determined that it “fails as a matter of law” because—among other things—“[n]either the IRA nor any other federal law requires AstraZeneca to sell its drugs to Medicare beneficiaries.” AstraZeneca, 2024 WL 895036, at 41. “On the contrary,” the court held, “participation in the Medicare program is a voluntary undertaking.” Id. at 41 (citing Livingston Care Ctr., Inc. v. United States, 934 F.2d 719, 720 (6th Cir. 1991); Dayton Area Chamber of Com. v. Becerra. . . .
Notably, the court reached this conclusion over the plaintiffs’ objection that Medicare accounted for such a large part of the “potential market for prescription drugs” that they had “a powerful incentive” to participate. Id. at 43. Access to Medicare, the court observed, is not a “gun to the head” but rather “is a potential economic opportunity that [the plaintiffs are] free to accept or reject. . . .”
Now you know. Onward, grinning into a warmer sunny afternoon here. Bike time!
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment