Pharma Industry Scorns Governor's Opioid Surtax Proposal
PhRMA, the powerful Washington-based advocacy group that represents pharmaceutical companies, blasted a proposal by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to levy a 2-cents-per-milligram surtax on opioid prescription medication sold in the state to help fund measures against the drug epidemic.
January 18, 2018 at 01:36 PM
4 minute read
ALBANY—A national trade group representing the pharmaceutical industry is vehemently opposed to a proposal by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to levy a tax on opioids.
On Tuesday, during his annual budgetary address to the Legislature, Cuomo unveiled an “Opioid Epidemic Surcharge,” a 2-cent-per-morphine-milligram tax on opioids pharmaceutical companies sell in the state. The surcharge on opioids is expected to “provide a financial disincentive for the use of these drugs and generate roughly $125 million to support ongoing efforts to address the opioid crisis,” according to Cuomo's budget briefing book.
“Opioid manufacturers have created an epidemic. We would have an opioid surcharge—2 cents per milligram [that] will be paid by the manufacturer and would go to offset the costs that we're spending to fight opioid abuse,” Cuomo said during his Tuesday speech.
PhRMA, the powerful Washington-based advocacy group that represents pharmaceutical companies, blasted Cuomo's proposal, arguing that the narrowed focus doesn't take into consideration many other factors that have contributed to the spike of opioid use in the country.
“We are opposed to the proposed tax because it ignores all of the factors that resulted in the current crisis and unfairly penalizes and ostracizes vulnerable patients who legitimately rely on these medicines to treat serious, debilitating and sometimes fatal conditions,” said PhRMA spokeswoman Priscilla VanderVeer.
“The proposed tax also ignores the fact that this crisis is the result of a number of factors, including a deeply troubling influx of counterfeit fentanyl and other illegal drugs coming into the U.S. through drug trafficking organizations the DEA [Drug Enforcement Administration] is monitoring, which is contributing to an increase in overdose deaths.”
VanderVeer added that the organization “would welcome the opportunity” to meet with the Cuomo administration to come up with a plan to curb opioid use. Last fall, PhRMA announced support for some state and federal policies aimed at curbing abuse, including support for limiting opioid prescriptions to seven days for acute pain. In June 2016, the governor signed legislation into law that would reduce prescription limits for opioids for acute pain from 30 days to a seven-day supply.
Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi countered PhRMA's remarks, charging that the industry fueled the opioid epidemic.
“Big Pharma and the health insurance companies just got a big federal tax break while at the same time created the machine that fueled the opioid crisis. Spare me the song and dance about corporations crying poverty, like the tobacco companies, this money is going to help fight the problem they created,” Azzopardi said in an email.
Azzopardi did not immediately say whether the 2-cent surtax would apply to opioid medications used to treat addiction, such as methadone or buprenorphine.
Cuomo is not the first to propose such a tax. Nan Whaley, the Democratic mayor of Dayton, Ohio, who had been running for governor, proposed a similar surcharge on prescription opioids. Hillary Clinton, in her 2016 presidential campaign, endorsed the idea of a 1-cent-per-milligram tax on opioid prescriptions paid by the manufacturer or importer, according to an Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld compilation of the candidates' tax proposals.
Earlier this month, during his State of the State address to the Legislature, Cuomo announced plans to sue pharmaceutical companies for “perpetuating the opioid epidemic.” The Democratic governor's remarks come as a growing number of counties in New York and across the United States have sued the makers of opioid medications.
“[Pharmaceutical companies] were conveniently blind to the consequences of their action. They pumped these pills into society and created addiction. Like the tobacco industry they killed thousands. … We will make them pay,” Cuomo said earlier this month.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMore Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250