November 27, 2011
Drug prices in Japan are decided within the framework of the public healthcare insurance system. Many people fear that entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free-trade pact will raise the drug prices.
Through the process to conclude agreements for the World Trade Organization or bilateral FTAs, the United States has been trying to impose higher drug prices on other countries.
This U.S. policy aims to secure increased profits for the U.S. pharmaceutical industry by preventing less expensive generic medicines from entering the market and thus forcing drug prices higher.
The Japanese government admits that there is a possibility for the TPP to have provisions on medicines, as this is included in the U.S. Free Trade agreements with Australia and South Korea.
In the U.S.-South Korea free-trade pact, both countries agreed to extend the patent term for drugs with patent rights held by U.S. pharmaceutical companies and to maintain high drug prices.
Under the pact, if drug development companies file a complaint against the government allowing sale of generic medicines, sales must stop until the dispute is settled.
A South Korean news agency expressed concern that this will cause a delay in producing generic drugs, and pointed out that the Korean pharmaceutical industry, which depends on generic drugs, will be adversely affected.
The two countries also agreed to set up an independent institution to review drug prices decided by the Korean government if there are objections from overseas companies.
Meanwhile, the U.S.-Australia FTA changed Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), a framework to minimize the financial burden on patients.
Taking into consideration the low cost of generic drugs, the PBS limits drug costs used under the scheme. However, the United States opposed to the scheme, saying that it underestimates the importance of new drugs’ innovative achievements, and this set up a new category of medicines without the price limitation under the PBS. Some people point out that average medicine prices under the PBS went up due to the establishment of the new drug group.
In Japan, drug prices are decided within the framework of the public healthcare insurance system, which curbs patients’ charges to 10 through 30 percent of the total cost. Higher drug prices will increase the financial burden on patients, put pressure on insurance finances, and reduce funds for other healthcare services. This will ultimately sacrifice the public health.
As the TPP negotiation process proceeds, we can see rising opposition from the general public in Australia who are being forced to accept a further adverse change in Australia’s drug price system, and in New Zealand, where its national drug price scheme is in danger of being emasculated.
Through the process to conclude agreements for the World Trade Organization or bilateral FTAs, the United States has been trying to impose higher drug prices on other countries.
This U.S. policy aims to secure increased profits for the U.S. pharmaceutical industry by preventing less expensive generic medicines from entering the market and thus forcing drug prices higher.
The Japanese government admits that there is a possibility for the TPP to have provisions on medicines, as this is included in the U.S. Free Trade agreements with Australia and South Korea.
In the U.S.-South Korea free-trade pact, both countries agreed to extend the patent term for drugs with patent rights held by U.S. pharmaceutical companies and to maintain high drug prices.
Under the pact, if drug development companies file a complaint against the government allowing sale of generic medicines, sales must stop until the dispute is settled.
A South Korean news agency expressed concern that this will cause a delay in producing generic drugs, and pointed out that the Korean pharmaceutical industry, which depends on generic drugs, will be adversely affected.
The two countries also agreed to set up an independent institution to review drug prices decided by the Korean government if there are objections from overseas companies.
Meanwhile, the U.S.-Australia FTA changed Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), a framework to minimize the financial burden on patients.
Taking into consideration the low cost of generic drugs, the PBS limits drug costs used under the scheme. However, the United States opposed to the scheme, saying that it underestimates the importance of new drugs’ innovative achievements, and this set up a new category of medicines without the price limitation under the PBS. Some people point out that average medicine prices under the PBS went up due to the establishment of the new drug group.
In Japan, drug prices are decided within the framework of the public healthcare insurance system, which curbs patients’ charges to 10 through 30 percent of the total cost. Higher drug prices will increase the financial burden on patients, put pressure on insurance finances, and reduce funds for other healthcare services. This will ultimately sacrifice the public health.
As the TPP negotiation process proceeds, we can see rising opposition from the general public in Australia who are being forced to accept a further adverse change in Australia’s drug price system, and in New Zealand, where its national drug price scheme is in danger of being emasculated.
