Trump's "Most Favored Nation" Drug Pricing Order: A Double-Edged Sword?

Today's drug pricing order reportedly aims to match foreign prices - a bold solution to America's pharmaceutical crisis that carries both promise and unintended consequences.

In a healthcare system where Americans routinely pay multiples of what other developed nations pay for identical medications, President Trump's May 2025 Executive Order on " Most Favored Nation" drug pricing represents his second attempt to address a genuine crisis. But as with many policy solutions to complex problems, this approach carries both promise and peril.

The Undeniable Problem : America's Drug Pricing Crisis

Let's start with what's clear: the status quo in American pharmaceutical pricing is indefensible.

According to the White House, Americans pay more than three times what other OECD nations pay for brand-name drugs, even after accounting for discounts.

Consider these stark realities:

• The United States has <5% percent of the world's population, yet funds roughly 75% of global pharmaceutical profits

• A month's supply of Humira costs about $5,800 in the U.S., versus roughly $1 ,400 in the UK

• Insulin prices have risen over 1,000% since the 1990s, forcing many diabetics to ration life-saving medication

• Medicare, until recent reforms, was legally prohibited from negotiating drug prices

This pricing dysfunction isn 't just an economic issue- it's a humanitarian one.

Americans die because they can't afford their medications, while millions more cut pills in half, skip doses or choose between medicine and food.

The pharmaceutical industry defends these prices as “necessary” for innovation.

And there's some truth there- America funds a disproportionate share of global drug development.

But the current system has also enabled extraordinary profit margins that routinely exceed 20%, making pharmaceuticals one of America 's most profitable industries, often with taxpayer-subsidized research, for drugs that provide marginal or questionable impact.

What today’s Executive Order Actually Does

According to the White House’s Fact Sheet entitled, “Putting American Patients First by Lowering Drug Prices and Stopping Foreign Free-riding on American Pharmaceutical Innovation," the administration will implement several specific actions:

1. Establish Most-Favored-Nation Pricing: HHS to communicate price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to ensure America, "the largest purchaser and funder of prescription drugs in the world, gets the best deal"

2. Creates Direct-to-Consumer Pathway: Instructs HHS to establish a mechanism for Americans to buy drugs directly from manufacturers at "Most-Favored-Nation" prices, bypassing middlemen

3. Addresses Foreign Pricing Practices: Directs the U.S. Trade Representative and Secretary of Commerce to "take action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in practices that purposefully and unfairly undercut market prices and drive price hikes in the United States"

4. Establishes Enforcement Mechanisms: If manufacturers fail to offer Most-Favored-Nation pricing, HHS is directed to propose rules that impose such pricing and "take other aggressive measures" to reduce costs and end anti- competitive practices

The order represents an expansion of Trump 's first-term efforts, now including both Medicare and Medicaid, which the Biden Administration had rescinded before implementation. Trump claims this approach will cut drug prices by 59% or more.

In announcing the order, Trump criticized foreign pricing as "subsidizing socialism abroad with skyrocketing prices at home," noting examples where identical medications cost "four times, five times different" internationally.

The Economic Concern: Unintended Consequences

Despite these good intentions, economic reality suggests potential complications:

When prices are externally controlled, markets tend to respond with supply adjustments.

In pharmaceuticals, this could manifest in several concerning ways:

1. Delayed or abandoned drug launches in reference countries to avoid establishing low price benchmarks

2. Reduced investment in research and development for new treatments

3. Shifting of innovation toward less regulated products that offer higher returns

4. Strategic reallocation of limited supplies away from price-controlled markets

When countries implement strict price controls, they often experience shortages.

Venezuela 's extensive price controls led to widespread medication shortages. And even Canada, with its more measured approach, experiences drug shortages partly attributable to its pricing regulations.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) has consistently opposed such approaches, arguing government price setting in any form would harm American patients and innovation. Recent statements may signal a willingness to again fight the move in the courts.

The Global Context: America as the World's Medicine Cabinet

The uncomfortable truth acknowledged in the White House fact sheet is that high American prices effectively subsidize lower prices elsewhere. Specifically, drug manufacturers discount their products to gain access to foreign markets and then subsidize those discounts through high prices in America.

This policy aims to reverse this dynamic, shifting more of the innovation funding burden to other wealthy nations. The challenge is whether pharmaceutical companies will accept lower U.S. pricing or instead withdraw products from markets to protect their profits.

The challenge going forward is addressing America's untenable drug pricing without destroying the innovative ecosystem that has produced life-saving breakthroughs.

It’s worth noting that beneath all the economic analysis lies a moral question: Is it just for Americans to bear a disproportionate burden of global pharmaceutical development costs?

Trump's approach represents a bold approach to a legitimate crisis, but the effects of it remain uncertain.

Real reform requires acknowledging:

1. Current American drug pricing is unjustifiably burdensome to patients and taxpayers

2. Overly aggressive price controls risk undermining the innovation ecosystem that produces medical breakthroughs

The path forward demands nuanced policies that balance reasonable pricing with innovation incentives- a challenging but essential task if we're to create a healthcare system that serves all Americans without sacrificing future medical progress.

What's clear is that the medical-industrial complex cannot continue extracting maximum profit at the expense of vulnerable Americans.

Reform is necessary.

The debate should center not on whether to act, but on how to act wisely.

Until next time,

Tiffany

---

What are your thoughts on the Most Favored Nation pricing approach? Have you experienced the impact of high prescription drug costs? I'd love to hear your perspective in the comments below.

*never medical or financial advice