Postponement on drug price negotiations

[annon123]

President Trump, by executive order, just postponed any more drug price negotiations for 4 additional years.

I think that it is unfortunate this delays drug (pill) price reductions, increasing costs (vs what they would have been with the future reductions that are now delayed). While there is still the $2k MOOP, those who are under that will not see any reduction in what they will spend on meds.

Medicare is the only health care system in the country that can't negotiate drug prices (except the 10 they just did) aand pharma can set whatever price they want. One study documented that the lower prices paid by other countries and every other insurance program in the USA means that pharma makes up for some of those discounts by increasing medicare program drug prices.

url goes to an article reprinted on MSN

MSN

 

[somarco]

@annon123 you are looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

Negotiating prices for 10, 20, 30 etc meds MAY only benefit a handful of folks.

Mark Cuban is now "endorsing" Trumps move to effectively remove PBM's from the equation. Doing so, will generate much greater savings for the majority of the population.

Gotta be honest. The
@realDonaldTrump
EO on healthcare and in particular, drug pricing could save hundreds of billions.

Here is how:
1. Divorce formularies from PBMs. Require them to come from independent organizations with no economic incentive from the formulary
Make them about wellness, not pay for play like a grocery store endcap. This ends rebates and allows for net pricing. It also allows for better care and wellness.

 

[InsuranceGuy29]

The most expensive drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy, Jardiance, etc. are still getting negotiated down, which is definitely a win for us brokers and seniors. These are the one that drive everyone's MOOP's up right away and drain their wallets and insurance/Medicare coffers. This only applies to more common "pill" drugs.

 

[sman]

President Trump, by executive order, just postponed any more drug price negotiations for 4 additional years.

I think that it is unfortunate this delays drug (pill) price reductions, increasing costs (vs what they would have been with the future reductions that are now delayed). While there is still the $2k MOOP, those who are under that will not see any reduction in what they will spend on meds.

Medicare is the only health care system in the country that can't negotiate drug prices (except the 10 they just did) aand pharma can set whatever price they want. One study documented that the lower prices paid by other countries and every other insurance program in the USA means that pharma makes up for some of those discounts by increasing medicare program drug prices.

url goes to an article reprinted on MSN

MSN

A few things. The MAPD/PDP carriers still negotiate prices. Second, we aren't talking about negotiating prices on thousands of medications, just the handful that are terribly expensive and certainly don't impact those "under" the $2k mark. Lastly, as @somarco pointed out, getting rid of PBM's will potentially save the consumer tons more money than Medicare negotiating prices on a handful of medications.

Ultimately we need our politicians to no be beholden to big pharma. Why is it that I can get a medication from a Canadian pharmacy for $170 (90-day supply) that is $700 for a one month supply here in the states? Why can manufacturers from all over the world create generics much sooner than here in the states?

 

[MedicareWAA]

Negotiating prices for 10, 20, 30 etc meds MAY only benefit a handful of folks.

The chosen drugs are among the most commonly filled brand name medicines covered by Part D. They're taken by millions of seniors … more than a handful.

Eliquis, Farxiga, Januvia, Jardiance, etc.

Next round was going to include Ozempic and a few other super common meds.

I'm not saying this was a good approach. There's plenty of evidence and logic that suggests they'll just raise other prices to offset these reductions.

 

[somarco]

Understanding the Inflation Reduction Act’s Impact on Prescription Drug Costs - The Hospitalist

How has the inflation reduction act affected prescription drug costs

www.the-hospitalist.org

 

[somarco]

Negotiating prices may sound wonderful but the end results don't always match the political rhetoric.

Carriers and manufacturers employ counter-measures to protect profits, including . . .

Removing the drug from production

No longer distributing the drug in the US

Drug plans & PBM's drop the drug from the formulary



Politicians of all stripes are lawyers (most never practiced law), not business people. They view the world as static but create laws/regs that have loopholes.

The luxury tax is a prime example of political ignorance.

In November 1991, The United States Congress enacted a luxury tax and was signed by President George H. W. Bush. The goal of the tax was to generate additional revenues to reduce the federal budget deficit. This tax was levied on material goods such as watches, expensive furs, boats, yachts, private jet planes, jewelry and expensive cars. Congress enacted a 10 percent luxury surcharge tax on boats over $100,000, cars over $30,000, aircraft over $250,000, and furs and jewelry over $10,000. The federal government estimated that it would raise $9 billion in excess revenues over the following five-year period. However, only two years after its imposition, in August 1993, at the behest of the luxury yacht industry, President Bill Clinton and Congress eliminated the "luxury tax" citing a loss in jobs.[6] The luxury automobile tax remained in effect until 2002.

Luxury tax - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The law of unintended consequences prevailed.

 

[axeman462]

Negotiating prices may sound wonderful but the end results don't always match the political rhetoric.

Carriers and manufacturers employ counter-measures to protect profits, including . . .

Removing the drug from production

No longer distributing the drug in the US

Drug plans & PBM's drop the drug from the formulary



Politicians of all stripes are lawyers (most never practiced law), not business people. They view the world as static but create laws/regs that have loopholes.

The luxury tax is a prime example of political ignorance.

In November 1991, The United States Congress enacted a luxury tax and was signed by President George H. W. Bush. The goal of the tax was to generate additional revenues to reduce the federal budget deficit. This tax was levied on material goods such as watches, expensive furs, boats, yachts, private jet planes, jewelry and expensive cars. Congress enacted a 10 percent luxury surcharge tax on boats over $100,000, cars over $30,000, aircraft over $250,000, and furs and jewelry over $10,000. The federal government estimated that it would raise $9 billion in excess revenues over the following five-year period. However, only two years after its imposition, in August 1993, at the behest of the luxury yacht industry, President Bill Clinton and Congress eliminated the "luxury tax" citing a loss in jobs.[6] The luxury automobile tax remained in effect until 2002.

Luxury tax - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The law of unintended consequences prevailed.

@somarco this is the internet, logic and reason doesn't belong here.

Happy Resurrection Sunday

 

[ehall2]

I have a MA plan with Aetna. Was satisfied with it until they withdrew the plan and I had to get another 1/1/25. I had to stay with Aetna but my drug cost are killing me and my wife. I was paying $54 for 30 day supply of Jardiance, it is now $102.00. My wife was prescribed an eye drop that was a $54.00 co pay but is now a $200.00 copay. I can't move to another company because I have to have a cystoscope every 90 days and my urologist isn't in the network for any company but Aetna. United Health Care and other companies are in the network for the urology clinic but not the surgical center. This makes no sense to me. The surgical center of my urologist has tried to get in UHC's network for years but UHC won't approve them because UHC is in network for our local hospital.

 

[sman]

I have a MA plan with Aetna. Was satisfied with it until they withdrew the plan and I had to get another 1/1/25. I had to stay with Aetna but my drug cost are killing me and my wife. I was paying $54 for 30 day supply of Jardiance, it is now $102.00. My wife was prescribed an eye drop that was a $54.00 co pay but is now a $200.00 copay. I can't move to another company because I have to have a cystoscope every 90 days and my urologist isn't in the network for any company but Aetna. United Health Care and other companies are in the network for the urology clinic but not the surgical center. This makes no sense to me. The surgical center of my urologist has tried to get in UHC's network for years but UHC won't approve them because UHC is in network for our local hospital.

When Aetna withdrew the plan, you had a chance to get a Medicare Supplement on a guarantee issue basis. Any reason you didn't do that?