RUTH SUNDERLAND: Donald Trump's bitter pill for pharma could benefit UK

Trump’s Pharma Tariff Threat: A UK Economic Concern

President Donald Trump’s proposition to penalize pharmaceutical companies with what are considered illogical and indefensible tariffs presents a notable danger to the United Kingdom. The life sciences sector is a domain where the UK distinguishes itself and is recognized by the government as a vital driver for national economic progress.

Impact on UK Investments and Pensions

Imposing levies on pharmaceuticals would negatively affect UK pensioners and savers. The most highly valued firm on the FTSE 100 is the pharma giant AstraZeneca, with GSK as another key component of the index. These stocks, which have experienced declines recently, are widely owned by individual investors.

Ireland’s Exposure to Pharma Tariffs

Tariffs on pharmaceuticals also constitute a grave menace for Ireland. Its exceptionally low corporation tax rate has historically attracted substantial US corporations, including Eli Lilly and Pfizer.

Uncertainty Surrounds Tariff Details

The specifics of the potential levies remain unclear. Trump has initiated an inquiry into medicine imports into the US as an initial step, suggesting a possible tariff of 25 percent in the ‘near future’.

WTO Agreement Under Scrutiny

Regardless of the specifics, Trump intends to dismantle a 30-year-old World Trade Organisation accord that exempts medications from tariffs in various developed nations.

Ethical Considerations of Drug Tariffs

The ethical dimension of these tariffs is debatable. Medicines transcend ordinary commodities; they are indispensable for human well-being. Diseases, as highlighted by the Covid pandemic, are not confined by national boundaries.

Trump’s “Rip-off” Rationale

The purported ‘justification’ aligns with Trump’s recurring assertion that the US is being exploited.

US Pharma Innovation and Pricing Claims

According to his viewpoint, most pharmaceutical advancement occurs in the US, primarily financed by American patients who face higher drug expenses compared to those in other countries. Furthermore, some prominent US pharma enterprises have moved operations to countries with lower taxes, notably Ireland, thus reducing US Treasury revenue. Therefore, in his view, foreign entities are benefiting unfairly.

Expert Insights on US “Grumpiness”

Sir John Bell, a distinguished figure and former Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford, currently president of the Ellison Institute, recently indicated understanding of why Americans might be ‘somewhat disgruntled’ about the current circumstances.

Complexities of Drug Pricing and Corporate Tax

However, this is a simplistic and highly disputable depiction that fails to grasp the intricate and opaque nature of drug pricing mechanisms and strategies for corporate taxation. It is not immediately apparent that ‘foreigners’ are solely accountable.

Incentivizing US-Based Pharma Production

The stated intention is to encourage pharmaceutical firms to establish facilities within the US – a move already underway for companies like GSK and Astra. This process is neither swift, straightforward, nor inexpensive. Future expenditures will likely escalate due to steel tariffs. Some firms might deem the relocation not worthwhile, particularly considering Trump’s potentially limited remaining term in office.

Impact on Generic Drug Manufacturers

The motivation to relocate is minimal for manufacturers of generic drugs that are off-patent, many of which are produced in India. These constitute the majority of medications dispensed to patients in the US.

Potential Backfire of Tariffs

Tariffs may well prove counterproductive, potentially causing Americans to pay more for essential medicines and encounter shortages of required drugs. This issue is anticipated to be discussed when Chancellor Rachel Reeves engages with White House representatives in Washington this week.

Opportunity in Talent Acquisition

A potential benefit could emerge. Trump’s critical stance on US universities might have alienated distinguished academics.

Attracting Disaffected Scientists to the UK

It’s conceivable that the UK could attract scientists dissatisfied with the President’s policies to pursue opportunities in British universities or leading companies.

“Moron Premium” and Reverse Brain Drain

Previously, bond markets identified a ‘moron’ premium associated with the UK economy due to policies enacted during Liz Truss’s tenure. While this ‘moron premium’ might have shifted across the Atlantic without tariffs, the UK could gain from a reverse brain drain, attracting talent back to the country.