Dean Baker: TPP Means 10,000% Tariffs on Drugs & Other Products (which HRC promoted 45 times on CNN)

[amborin]

But what is even more striking is the selective concern over tariffs. While Trump wants to put large tariffs on imports from some of our major trading partners, President Obama is actively pushing to have far larger tariffs imposed on a wide range of goods in his trade deals, most importantly the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Measures in the TPP pushed by US negotiators will raise the price of many items by several thousand percent above the free market price.

If you missed this discussion, it's because these trade barriers are referred to as "intellectual property," which takes the form of patent and copyright protection. But markets don't care what term politicians use to describe a government imposed barrier. If a patent monopoly raises the price of a protected drug by 10,000 percent, it leads to the same sort of waste and corruption as if the government imposed a tariff of 10,000 percent, except that in the case of prescription drugs, high prices can also threaten lives.

If a price increase of 10,000 percent sounds high, you haven't been paying attention to what the drug industry charges for its new drugs. For example, the list price for the Hepatitis C drug Sovaldi is $84,000 for a three-month course of treatment. A recent analysis found that Indian manufacturers can profitably produce the drug for just $200 per three-month course of treatment, suggesting a tariff equivalent of more than 40,000 percent.

And we have ample evidence that patent monopolies produce the same sort of distortions that trade theory predicts from extraordinarily high tariffs. First, we have a whole army of lobbyists who descend on government officials constantly pushing for stronger and longer patent protections. The industry employs a fleet of highly paid lawyers who attempt to intimidate generic competitors from entering a market, even if legitimate claims to protection have already expired.

snip

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/35389-think-trump-s-45-percent-tariffs-are-bad-try-obama-s-10-000-percent-tariffs

[revbones]

1. Wait. That would seem to imply that Obama isn't working for the best interests of the people

Hmmmm. That would be counter to that magic "D" behind his name that some here argue grants immunity from all wrong-doing.

Wonder how those people would resolve that?




For the jury:
I said that the article would seem to imply that... I didn't say he wasn't. Even if I had, it's well within the Terms of Service: "members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials,"

[MisterP]

2. but we're the party of nice things!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11001142

[Samantha]

3. Is this why some Medicare Part D plans now have co-insurance instead of simply a dollar deductible?

Is that what Bill Clinton and Paul Ryan where whispering about when they were discussing cutting Medicare -- or is there more in the works?

Sam

[Recursion]

4. I thought DU liked tariffs? (nt)

[Armstead]

5. Not when used in that way...Its a reverse tariff

It says that our monopolies have to bevallowed to be monopolies in other countries.... the inflated prices in the US have to be charged in poor nations too.

it is inflicting our fucked up health policies on other nations.

[Avalon Sparks]

6. And on ourselves too...

Also after TPP we can kiss the majority of generic drugs goodbye.

The way I read it, patents on new drugs can be renewed indefinitely.

And drug companies can now buy the companies that sell the generic versions, and then quit selling them.

The lobbyists sure paid off in spades didn't they.

I'm sure there won't be any Hillary supporters commenting here on why they support this.


This is just the damage the TPP brings in this area, there's more equally troubling areas throughout.

And yes, Obama has been working on it for the last 7 years, .......which makes me feel like an idiot for supporting him.

[BlueStateLib]

12. Drug patents can be renewed for another 20 years each time there is a change in an indication

or delivery

The TPP gives 20 years of patent protection for pharmaceuticals and medical devices; however, patents can be renewed for another 20 years each time there is a change in an indication or delivery.

For instance, if a drug is indicated for headaches, but then the pharmaceutical company finds that it is also helpful for stomach cramps or makes it a capsule instead of a tablet, a new patent may be issued. In reality, patents could be extended indefinitely under provisions of the TPP since under International Law free trade provisions take precedence over the internal laws of nations.
http://www.worldviewopinion.net/tpp/

[Armstead]

19. As I understand it (which may be wrong) they make a change and....

call it a new product with a new patent.

However, the old patent expires and generics can be made from that.

[Recursion]

18. So why was India brought up?

India is not a TPP signatory. They produce incredibly cheap drugs here (I live in Mumbai) but they're also incredibly sketchy as far as quality goes.

[Armstead]

20. As an example of the disparity...also

(and this is conjecture) the author may be referring to the ability to keep drugs like the Indian product out of markets covered by the TPP.

In others, if it is okay to sell an Indian generic in a TPP country prior to the agreement at a reasonable costs, TPP could force the price to be jacked up instead. Or else eliminate that market for the manufacturer.

[AzDar]

7. She STILL supports the TPP, make no mistake...

[AZ Progressive]

8. And conveniently Hillary supporters are silent on this...

Shills and corporate lackeys.

[Juicy_Bellows]

9. She'll pivot to the TPP so fast it would make Stephen Curry blush with envy. Nt.

[pampango]

10. Damn! Not a Hillary supporter but give us 'shills and corporate lackeys' a chance to respond.

The OP was posted at 12:55 PM with one response at 1:04. By the time I logged on to DU in the evening it must not have been on GD-P first page and I didn't scroll down far enough to see it.

From the article:

Lately the media have been going wild mocking Donald Trump's plans to put 45 percent tariffs on imports from China. They are partly right. It's not clever to indiscriminately impose large tariffs on major trading partners in violation of existing trade agreements.

If a price increase of 10,000 percent sounds high, you haven't been paying attention to what the drug industry charges for its new drugs. For example, the list price for the Hepatitis C drug Sovaldi is $84,000 for a three-month course of treatment. A recent analysis found that Indian manufacturers can profitably produce the drug for just $200 per three-month course of treatment, suggesting a tariff equivalent of more than 40,000 percent.

And we have ample evidence that patent monopolies produce the same sort of distortions that trade theory predicts from extraordinarily high tariffs. First, we have a whole army of lobbyists who descend on government officials constantly pushing for stronger and longer patent protections.

So we do face a very real threat of protectionism, but it is in the form of the Obama administration pushing for stronger and longer patent and related protections in the TPP and other trade deals.

This is a really good article. (And no one ever accused Donald of being 'clever'.)

The "extraordinarily high tariffs" that FDR inherited from Herbert Hoover were the result of "a whole army of lobbyists who descend on government officials constantly pushing for" higher tariffs to protect their business or industry from foreign competition. FDR saw through this and broke the back of the corporate hold on trade policy. Then he tried to push a multilateral system for governing trade that would prevent corporate dominance of national governments from controlling trade policy in the future. republicans shot it down. Now here we are.

Now Obama and the pharmaceutical industry are doing the same thing that 'Hoover' republicans did back in the day, only they are using 'stronger and longer patent protections'.

Perhaps we are better off with the WTO and NAFTA rules than with the TPP.

[reddread]

11. Bernie Bros trying to elect Trump

[Avalon Sparks]

14. Do you have anything to add about the TPP?

Btw, according to current polls Sanders beats all three GOP candidates with higher spreads then Hillary, so why make an inaccurate and also irrelevant comment in this thread.

[reddread]

16. parody

[Avalon Sparks]

17. Ok got it....

LOL, you nailed it too well to be parody.

[Vattel]

13. But Clinton said that TPP sets the gold standard of trade agreements.

Oh wait, she now claims that she said that she only "hoped it would be the gold standard."

Oh wait, that claim is a lie. She said that "TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements." She also said that TPP is "exciting," "innovative," "ambitious," "groundbreaking," "cutting-edge," "high-quality" and "high-standard."

[Avalon Sparks]

15. Yes she can't wait to sign it...

That's the job she was paid to do, after all. She'll probably get a bonus in the form of Bill making a speech at a Pharm conference. Right to their personal checking account.