The Trump administration made news yesterday by announcing pharmaceutical (and computer chip) tariffs are imminent, by which most assume mid-May. The stated purpose of the pharma tariffs is simple: move both branded and generic/biosimilar API and biologics manufacturing away from India, Ireland, China, and other countries, and relocate it to the US. Ostensibly, this is in the name of boosting manufacturing in the US, as well as increasing security by ensuring life-saving medicines are domestically produced. In fact, pharmaceuticals are the biggest export from the EU to the US, worth $127B, and for nearly 700 APIs approved in the US, the EU is currently the only supplier. 83% of the top generics in the US have no US source, exposing the US reliance on other countries.
The two strategies pharma companies are choosing between in response to the tariffs, as well as previous moves to curtail Chinese pharma imports, are 1) investing in US manufacturing e.g. Lilly, J&J, Merck and Novo Nordisk 2) not doing anything and waiting for an administration change instead, as setting up major regulated manufacturing operations takes 3-5 years, and could cost 25% more than usual due to steel tariffs.
In the biotech R&D community, the danger is the additional production costs big pharmas incur with either of the above scenario eats into their budgets for R&D, which could lead to less appetite for M&A, licensing, and investors. Additionally, some experts don’t believe tariffs will achieve Trump’s goals, and the way to do so is through tax incentives (deductions, credits and reduced rates for manufacturing), streamlined regulations, availability of low interest financing for manufacturing, and prioritized government procurement. On the consumer side, some experts believe the US will not be able to build a competitive level of manufacturing with India, China or Europe and instead of achieving manufacturing autonomy, the US will instead drive-up costs for patients.
Industry analysts have proposed more speculative scenarios as well, namely that Europe, no longer with a dependable production and R&D partner with the US, will implement the tax, regulatory, financing and procurement incentives mentioned above to boost the EU pharma industry to levels much more competitive with the US. The EFPIA, heading into crisis talks with the EU Commission said as much: “[The EU must] deliver rapid, radical policy change… strengthening… Europe’s intellectual property provisions… achieving a competitive EU market that attracts, values and rewards innovation in line with other economies at the forefront of patient care.”
As the saying goes, the one constant in life is change, and that seems to apply especially to tariffs of late. Early stage companies can reduce their risk by focusing on their cash runway, and leveraging investor partnering tools like RESI and the LSN investor database to accelerate their fundraising.
Next Phase Newsletter 
Leave a comment