Tax disclosure forms for 2016 show that the pharmaceutical industry’s biggest trade group, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), raised revenue by almost one-fourth and spent the millions collected among hundreds of lobbyists, politicians, and patient groups—the largest income surge reported by the group since 2009, when it was mobilizing forces to advance the industry’s interests prior to the passage of the Affordable Care Act.
Tax disclosure forms for 2016 show that the pharmaceutical industry’s biggest trade group, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), raised revenue by almost one-fourth and spent the millions it collected among hundreds of lobbyists, politicians, and patient groups—the largest income surge reported by the group since 2009, when it was mobilizing forces to advance the industry’s interests prior to the passage of the Affordable Care Act.
The tax filing, reported by Jay Hancock of Kaiser Health News (KHN), shows how PhRMA increased dues by member companies and increased other income in 2016 to $271 million, up from $220 million in 2015.
PhRMA’s increased spending in 2016 coincides with a spate of bad publicity about high drug prices after several previously inexpensive drugs became extremely costly almost overnight, as when Turing Pharmaceutical’s former CEO, Martin Shkreli, obtained the manufacturing license of a 62-year-old life-saving antiparasitic medication and raised its price from $13.50 to $750 per pill. In addition, candidates in the US presidential election criticized pharma companies because of high drug prices. Then-candidate Donald Trump also criticized high drug prices and said that he could save $300 billion annually by making drug companies bid on business.
In response, PhRMA spent $7 million in 2016 to prepare its “Go Boldly” advertising campaign, which shows patients and researchers united in the fight against diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer disease. The campaign also shows individual patients who benefit from the significant advances allowed by new medications.
PhRMA also gave millions to politicians of both parties who were up for election in dozens of state and federal races, and donated to both parties’ Governors Associations as well as to the American Action Network, a conservative-leaning group. PhRMA’s state and federal lobbying spending rose by more than two-thirds from 2015 to $57 million. The group gave money to states where policymakers were considering setting drug price limits or requiring greater price transparency. For example, PhRMA gave $64 million to a California fund, which was set up to defeat a proposal to require state agencies to pay no more for drugs than the federal Department of Veterans Affairs paid. According to KHN, that fund, which was also supported by direct contributions from drug companies, spent $110 million to defeat the initiative.
Additionally, the organization spent more than $2 million on a number of organizations representing patient groups, many of whose members require high-cost drugs. For example, the American Autoimmune Related Disease Association, the American Lung Association, the Lupus Foundation of America, and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation received some of the largest donations from PhRMA.
PhRMA’s tax disclosure states that its mission is to conduct effective advocacy for public policies that encourage discovery of important new medicines for patients by pharmaceutical and biotechnology research companies. “PhRMA achieves this by working with, and on behalf of, its member companies before governmental and regulatory bodies in the United States and throughout the world in support of pro-patient, pro-innovation policies; specifically, PhRMA advocates for broad patient access to safe and effective medicines through a free market, without government price controls; strong intellectual property incentives; and transparent, efficient regulation and a free flow of information to patients.”
PHRMA’s spokesperson, Holly Campbell, told The Center for Biosimilars® in an email that the organization doesn’t comment on its contributions aside from what is reported in the tax disclosure. She noted that PhRMA engages with stakeholders across the health care system to hear their perspectives and priorities: “PhRMA works with many organizations with which we have both agreements and disagreements on public policy issues, and believe engagement and dialogue are critical.”
Exploring the Biosimilar Horizon: Julie Reed's Predictions for 2024
February 18th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, Julie Reed, executive director of the Biosimilars Forum, returns to discuss her predictions for the biosimilar industry for 2024 and beyond as well as the impact that the Forum's 4 new members will have on the organization's mission.
The 6 Key Policy Factors to Ensure Biosimilar Market Sustainability
April 16th 2024Magnus Bodin, senior director and head of international access and policy at Biogen, presented warning signs for unsustainable biosimilar markets as well as key factors needed to create effective policies and future-proof biosimilar markets globally.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
Global Biosimilar Market Projected to Reach $1.3 Trillion by 2032
April 11th 2024The global biosimilar market is projected to surge from $25.1 billion in 2022 to approximately $1.3 trillion by 2032, with a compound annual growth rate of 17.6%, driven mainly by the increasing prevalence of cancer and the cost-effectiveness of biosimilars, as outlined in a report by Towards Healthcare.
Biosimilars Council: PBM Rebate Schemes Cost Americans, Payers $6 Billion
April 10th 2024A report from the Biosimilars Council evaluating IQVIA data found that rebate schemes orchestrated by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are costing US patients and payers billions of dollars by suppressing biosimilar adoption.