Chat with us, powered by LiveChat
AMAC In The Media / Press Releases

Suspicious ‘Profit Sharing’ Deals between Makers of Generic and Branded Drugs under Scrutiny, Says AMAC

AMAC Dan Weber The Association of Mature American Citizens AMAC‘Seniors wind up paying the cost of these so-called pay-for-delay settlements’ – 

BOHEMIA, NY, Mar 29 – Generic drug companies get paid by Big Pharma to delay production of cheaper alternatives.  It’s a mega-million dollar practice that has come under scrutiny by the Supreme Court, which heard arguments this week regarding the legality of such transactions, according to the Association of Mature American Citizens.

“It is consumers – seniors, in particular – who wind up paying the cost of these so-called pay-for-delay settlements,” Andy Mangione, a senior AMAC executive, said.

Here’s how it works.  A company that produces generic drugs formulates a less expensive equivalent to its brand name counterpart and sues to begin production and marketing before the brand’s patent runs its course.  The maker of the brand name drug turns around and pays a multi-million dollar ‘settlement’ to buy a few more years for its monopoly, Mangione explained.

“For lack of a better description, the generic companies and the brand name companies that engage in such practices are ‘colluding’ to keep certain generic drugs on the sideline and both are reaping huge rewards.  One gets a big-buck payoff and the other buys time to sell more of its profitable brand name product.  Meanwhile, seniors – many of them on low, fixed incomes – are forced to pay for higher priced branded drugs.”

Mangione appeared this week on the Willis Report, which airs on the Fox Business News channel, and pointed out that retirees in the U.S. can pay more than half of their incomes for pharmaceuticals.

“As a matter of fact, we know for a fact that a lot of AMAC members are still working past 65 in order to pay for their healthcare, including their medications.  So these settlements between generic manufactures and prescription drug manufacturers are skewing competition,” he told host Geri Willis.

He pointed out that the kinds of “profit-sharing” settlements that the Supreme Court is investigating are on the rise.  In 2005, three such deals were made, but last year 40 purported settlements were made, he noted.

A court ruling on the practice is expected in June.

 

NOTE TO EDITORS: Dan Weber is available for telephone interviews on this issue.  Editors/reporters may contact John Grimaldi at 917-846-8485 or jpgrimaldi@verizon.net to set up a call.

 

ABOUT AMAC

The Association of Mature American Citizens [http://www.amac.us] is a vibrant, vital and conservative alternative to those organizations, such as AARP, that dominate the choices for mature Americans who want a say in the future of the nation.  Where those other organizations may boast of their power to set the agendas for their memberships, AMAC takes its marching orders from its members.  We act and speak on their behalf, protecting their interests, and offering a conservative insight on how to best solve the problems they face today.

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by Daniel C. Weber

27
Leave a Reply

11 Comment threads
16 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
20 Comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Rodney

For those of you on here commenting on articles from AMAC. President Weber made comments that the Sequestration will Create Havoc for seniors. The members comments section was nearly 100 % condemnation of his words…and most members were either canceling AMAC or not going to renew their membership. AMAC has already taken that article down before more members read it. I have informed them I intend to pound on AMAC for his comments until he is gone as the AMAC leader or until the membership drops so much that AMAC is no longer a viable alternative to AARP. The very fact they pulled this article this quickly shows how scared AMAC leadership is of the nearly 100 % condemnation that article was getting from the members. Now you know folks…until Weber is gone…AMAC can never be the conservative alternative to AARP. Demand Weber be replaced immediately. Demand the article be… Read more »

Carl

It is common for big pharma to sell the same drug in other countries for a much lower price than they sell it here in the US. A law should be passed making this illegal. I believe just this simple change would lower drug prices here in the US.

David

Medicare was refusing to pay for generic Lipitor for several months, and although they now do, the co-pay is still prohibitive for most limited income seniors.

The Drug industry is still crippled by the failure to enact any kind of tort reform because the vast majority of Democratic legislators are lawyers who got rich by being “ambulance chasers” (A good example is the Obama family… Michelle is a multi-millionaire “ambulance chaser” lawyer)…

Until we clean out the blood sucker mentality from both of the Parties, no reform will ever occur!!!!

Disruptive Element

In the words of Mike Royko (may he rest in peace) We are suffering from terminal jurisprudence.

Ron Hirschkind

In spite of opposition by our government, and drug manufacturers the only way to obtain prescription drugs at fairer prices is on line from Canadian pharmacies. They frequently have generics, unavailable here in the U.S and offer
higher cost meds at substantially lower prices. Other than the wait time perhaps a month the savings is substantial considering these are usually maintenance drugs ordered in 90 day amounts. The meds are shipped from various parts of the world, and produced to the same standards that we get here . Service is better than from traditional
US mail order companies that I have used. Additional cost factor to consider is that your are not paying a monthly premium or copay.You just pay for your prescription and frequently some of these pharmacies ship at no cost. Others charge a minimal shipping fee.

BillG

The FTC has been asleep at the wheel regarding non-competetive practices for years. The endless stream of mergers have simply been one competitor buying out the other to gain market share. This is always results in higher prices, to the detriment of the consumer.

While the federal government has grown oversized in almost all areas, the FTC appears to have been purchased by big money.

Van Hamlin

Very good article!

Kenneth W. Bowman

This does not surprise me as the LOVE OF MONEY trumps all else with EVIL DOERS! Without Christian morals where nothing is wrong, nothing is right either.

Disruptive Element

Actually from the moment a new drug is approved and manufactured the generic companies begin with trying to overturn and find loopholes in the patent. The Pharmas has to spend on lawyers trying to protect their patents. I don’t blame the Pharmaceutical companies. It costs a lot of money to bring a drug to fruition. They should be able to keep their patents for as long as the law allows without fending off generic foes. In addition I feel generic is inferior no matter what they say. . In fact the drug companies should be willing to bring their own drugs to generic when the time comes to go off patent. At least you would know the drug does what they are prescribed to do which involves the coatings of the pills etc. I have no sympathy for generic company leaches and actually do not like being forced to use… Read more »

Ruth Selleck

Like most politicians, Drug companies want to keep as much money coming in as they can. These things always hurt the consumer in some way. I hope they find this practice to be illegal, but if the judges decide to allow it, there will be little that can be done. Our country has made Americans bow down, long enough, I am happy to see Amac fighting for what is right.

PaulE

This will be an interesting case to watch and to see how the court decides this one. What is being described is another version of the old “green-mail” schemes of the 1980s. In essence, one party usually the one with deep pockets, agrees to pay another party to not compete or file a lawsuit, that would hinder the business in some way. Here you have big pharma offering to settle with the generic guys, so big pharma can get another couple of years revenue out of the pipeline for some brand name drug. The little guys, so to speak, get paid for essentially agreeing to do nothing. The loser in all of this is of course the consumer. No big surprise there. However, neither party involved in this “settlement process” (what used to be called a financial shakedown before political correctness white-washed everything) is interested in the consumer for anything… Read more »