Today’s New York Times has a sympathetic portrait of PhRMA, the large drug companies association, fretting over the uncertainty they face because the health care bills leave the deals they cut with the White House and Senate in limbo.
After all, in return for the prospect of tens of millions of newly insured customers and a large degree of regulatory certainty, the pharmaceutical industry had agreed to pay a relatively small price: $8 billion a year in discounts and fees. It was a modest compromise for an industry with $246 billion in prescription drug sales last year. . . .
And just as important, the industry had received assurances from the Obama administration and some critical Congressional Democrats that long-feared proposals that might have popular appeal — including government negotiation of Medicare drug prices and allowing the import of cheaper drugs from Canada — would be tabled in return for drug makers’ support of the rest of the health care overhaul. And some industry experts say any notions of an offshore tax had also been taken off the table.
There are more deal details here, but PhRMA’s even more upset because, they claim, the Obama Administration 2011 budget blindsided them with a proposed tax on foreign profits. Oh horrors!
President Obama’s proposed budget this week, for example, includes a plan he alluded to in last week’s State of the Union address: a new tax on profits from some patents and other intangible assets parked in overseas tax havens by American companies. . . .
“Typically when a pharmaceutical company develops a new drug, it transfers it to a holding company in a tax haven like Bermuda or the Cayman Islands, usually on very favorable terms,” [a former Treasury economist] said. “There’s a tremendous amount of income taken out of the U.S. and put into the tax haven. This proposal seems targeted to just that type of situation.”
Pfizer has reported that 58 percent of its revenue came from overseas in 2008, compared with 39 percent a decade earlier. For other drug markets, overseas revenue in 2008 amounted to 46 percent for Lilly, 44 percent for Merck and 42 percent for Bristol-Myers.
Seems like a nice scam:
1. The drug maker creates and gets approval for a new drug.
2. It gains patents to insure government monopolies and/or gets 12-year approval for non-compete agreements with or against potential generics/rivals.
3. It then transfers the rights to an offshore affiliate in the Caymans.
4. The revenues/profits then nominally flow through to the "foreign" company.
5. The parent drug company, an American corporation, then evades the US taxes on these "foreign" profits.
6. Now they’re worried Obama’s proposed tax would go after those profits.
Al Capone had nothing on these guys. And Hamid Karzai is a worthy partner in comparison.
But I wonder, will the Administration do what Obama promised: put this all on national television, call in the experts, let the opposition take its shots, ask Congress to endorse it and then take the issue to the voters?



40 Comments







Answers to your last paragraph are “No, no, no, no and no.”
Thanks for the diary. Time to march them all off the gangplank.
i can think of another part of the scam:
1. The drug maker creates and gets approval for a new drug — using research funded by the fed gov and scientists trained on the fed gov’s dime.
p.s. scarecrow, i was going to write that you are on fire writing great posts, but i didn’t like the imagery (straw and flames thing), so i’ll just say “thank you”
Oh my stars! Those poor poor PharMAs! It’s a cryin’ shame I tell ya. A cryin’ shame. Boo fucking Hoo.
No, no, no, no.
You. took the words out of my mouth.
More theater to entertain the progressives and get their hopes up that he will actually try to do something positive. We know, and he knows, however, that the republicants and bluedogs will never let him tax the poor, overburdened pharma corps.
HP is reporting that Obama says health care reform may well die in Congress. He has no plans on meeting with Dems to craft a strategy. He’s too busy making preparations for his “bipartisan” Super Bowl party. Would FDR invited the party responsible for the Great Depression to the WH to listen to the World Series?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/05/obama-admits-health-care-_n_451557.html
That’s their take on Scarecrow’s earlier diary:
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/28220
He never said that.
Ain’t it getting interessing and interessing?
It’s almost time for the White House to unload their side of the story about the negotiations and how they kept the deal and PhRMA went around to their bought Congresscritters. Almost.
They burned Shelby. Will they burn PhRMA?
[lights torch, raises pitchfork]
“Burn! Buuuurnn!!”
My money is on the big putty cat backing off of this and allowing Pharma to continue business as usual. He has essentially wasted a year of the country’s time with non healthcare reform bill that he cant get passed with the democrats controlling the congress and the white house. Lets face it guys he is over his head. Instead of coming up with a plan to reform health care he sabotages it by making backroom deals with the very industries he has to negotiate against. His banking changes are being watered down and his foreclosure plan actually made things worse. Do we really think that this guy is going to turn around the jobs market in this country? He is going to dither with jobs like he has with everything else in hopes of running against a republican congress in 2012. Obama is a gifted speaker but his talent as an executive needs lots of development.
Ambassador Obama…
Well, I understand that Obama said, in essence, that “it” would “die in Congress” and then the people could decide if Congress had done ‘em right, and if’n they didn’t think as to how had Congress done ‘em any good, well shucks, there’s electshuns commin’ up and the people kin jus’ let Congress know how they’s feelin’ ’bout thangs … ‘cuz that is “how democracy works”.
I just knew havin’ a Harvard Law guy at the helm would be a wonderful “learnin’ moment”.
The question is: Is it a moment too soon?
“Cuz it looks like the Democrats are the ones folks ain’t happy with.
Now I ain’t sure how Obama feels ’bout this here business, that is whether HE likes the Dimocrats or not, but, being as how he is all warm and wiggly with the Republicans I don’t reckon as to his bein’ terribull upset if’n the Rethugs … ‘cuse me the Republicans, were to make a “clean sweep” come election time.
“Course I got ‘fess up that it tain’t the Dumbocrats I’m worried ’bout …
;~[
Scarecrow,
Please correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t big corps bringing foriegn profit home for virtually all of the bush years at a 5% tax rate? Is that still in place?
Great post by the way, thanks.
Hamid Karzai is a better partner in the drug biz. If the U.S. bought up the entire Afghan poppy crop and used it to make cheap heroine for pain, then the U.S. could leave Afghanistan PDQ. Heroine is a better pain killer, with fewer side effects, nonaddictive when used as a painkiller, than the expensive fancy patented drugs big PhRMA produces. So, of course, PhRMA is precluding the U.S. from doing anything so sensible.
To Kenya.
Turns out it’s a toss between Harvard Law & Harvard MBA. Whoda thunk?
Please, eCAHN, stop making sense.
It’s an addiction. I CAN’T stop.
You’d think that, by now, people would understand that “Harvard” is a warning label when it comes to government officials.
With all due respect, and I’m sayin with all due respect, heroin none addictive? Your kidding right?
There is not an ingestable substance on the planet that is more addictive.
Yeah, the Harvard Beets.
How ya doin’ eCAHN?
Saw your LOL comment ’bout mah supposed “politeness”.
Now, dear eCAHN, you know I am unfailingly polite …
‘Cept when I ain’t.
;~DW
Nonaddictive when used as a pain killer. Other uses, yes. That’s what I’ve been told & I have a niece on small doses for a chronic whiplash-type injury (couldn’t tolerate the fancy pharmas) who is the source of much of my info. I have also heard from others that used as a painkiller it’s nonaddictive. However, I am not an expert in this area, so willing to accept info from anyone who is.
Thought you deserved special mention for that one. *g*
Another anecdote. The murder trial when I was on the jury, one of the witnesses was a musician who was a heroine addict. He admitted to shooting up about 12 hours before the time of his testimony. No one on the jury had any problems believing what he said. He was lucid and there did not seem to be any mental impairment. So we need to look at the matter of recreational addiction in a different way.
I of course am willing to be wrong. My….um…contact…yeh that’s it, contact, with that substance may not have been in a clinical setting so YMMV.
I, too was impressed with that but was busy at work. Nicely done DWB!
(((oldnslow))) Hope that’s in the past.
I know several people who were on morphine pumps after surgeries with no problems out of the hospital, and they could dose themselves as needed.
Oh nicotine comes close.
But “addictive” is, too often, a moral pejorative “term”, though its deliberate misuse has furthered the careers of many politicians and prison “authorities”, eCAHN is clearly implying (we may infer) the controlled and proper use of the poppy’s “product”.
Consider an old person in terrible crippling pain … wouldn’t want ‘em to become addicted, would we?
Better we charge them a lot of money for something whose side-effects might be a trifle difficult, and there would be NO moral issues?
Sorry, oldnslow, a pet peeve, that bites at the ankles of annoyance.
DW
Well in excess of 3 decades.
I actually share your conviction.
Common street hreroin is cleaner than Oxycontin.
BBL.
Nicotine was one I could give up, interestingly enough. Liquor, not so much.
Addiction is an interesting, much underinvestigated subject.
Also the consequences of substance abuse: how it is linked to physical and psychological damage. For example, my late husband gave up smoking (along with me) two years before his death. We had a pack-a-day habit. But earlier in his life he had smoked 4 packs/day. Yet the autopsy showed lungs that were pink and healthy.
So addiction & abuse vary greatly among individuals, and because of the moral strictures involved in the subject, science does not impinge.
There you go, truthin’ agin, eCAHN.
Totally agree.
DW
Your understanding, for which you paid a true price, I am certain, reflects the humanity and, nobility, in its finest sense, which characterize your comments, oldnslow.
DW
No experinece with narcotics, prescribed or otherwise. However, I have never been able to tolerate ANY prescription drugs. Some have made me very ill. Very, very ill. And STILL my doctors insisted on prescribing more: try this, or this, or this.
So I investigated this “business,” the ingredients in these products (which have *nothing* to do with health), and the “practices” of researching, diagnosing, and prescribing.
One tries to be a good patient but that wears out eventually.
I take one last prescription: handmade by a special pharmacist ~ because the “safer” forms have been discontinued by the drug companies. I am in the process of seeing if I can do without. So far, it appears I will not be suffering the *dire* consequences predicted for removing myself from domestication by Big PhRMA. In fact, my health may be better for it.
Who is surprised? Not me. Not now.
You can be addicted to anything. And the impulse and the addiction can evaporate. ‘Tis a mystery.
What do the corps do with all that dough in Cayman banks? Do they actually invest it in developing new drugs or advertising their products abroad? Can they distribute earnings to stockholders without it being taxed?
It’s got to be an awkward situation for them to have a kind of fence between U.S. and overseas monies.
Ha Ha Ha! Less money for the ever annoying Viagra commercials? Besides what happened to the plan they soaked record $$$$$ into? The voters ever watchful eyes are on them and Obama in spite of the lack of transparency. Why don’t they get back in the business of developing real needed drugs, instead of worrying about their payouts and Lear jets. The corporations who cheat on the offshore banking scams should pay more taxes and fines!
How to fix Healthcare bill through reconciliation:
1. A strong public option–saves $110 billion (only $25 billion if it is the “level playing field” public option).
2. Replacing Senate “free rider” provision with employer mandate–generates an additional $107 billion.
3. Medicaid expansion from 133% to 150% FPL–saves $25 billion (in truth, Medicaid should be extended to 200% FPL, or whatever percentage it stops being more cost effective for the government).
4. Allowing drug re-importation–saves $19 billion.
5. Direct Medicare drug price negotiation (no official CBO score, but should save several billion dollars).
6. Early Medicare buy-in for 50-65, after the exchange starts (no official CBO score, but should save several billion dollars.
Total savings/revenue generated: roughly $260 billion (with additional but yet-un-scored savings from Medicare/Medicaid buy-in, and Medicare direct drug price negotiations.
Any opiate can be addictive. So are the pain-controlling, mood-altering products produced by the pharmaceutical companies, although some can be somewhat less so than the opiates. It’s also an unfortunate fact that some people have more addictive personalities than others. Your niece is probably one of those fortunate people who can tolerate controlled use of a potentially addictive substance–unfortunately, that may not be the case for others.