The story of tariffs on prescription medications has shifted quickly in recent weeks, with new trade agreements, industry reactions, and policy twists reshaping what patients may experience at the pharmacy counter.
One notable shift came with a new U.S.–EU trade agreement: branded drugs from Europe will now face a modest 15% tariff cap, while generics and the ingredients used to manufacture them — active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) — are largely exempt starting Sept. 1. This deal significantly softens the blow of previously floated 200% or even 250% tariffs. While this eases pressure on patients for now, branded medications may still see costs creep if companies decide to pass the smaller tariff onto consumers.
Patient access
The generics market, however, remains fragile. The CEO of generic pharmaceutical maker Sandoz has warned that the U.S. drug market is “distorted,” with some generic medications priced lower than everyday items like candy. Without stronger incentives, regulatory fair play and support for sellers of low-cost drugs, even small disruptions — like tariffs or legislative changes — could threaten patient access.
Meanwhile, Johnson & Johnson has responded to the uncertainty with a strategic $2 billion investment in a new manufacturing plant in North Carolina. This kind of domestic expansion could stabilize the supply chain over time, though its benefits won’t be felt immediately.
In the meantime, some health insurers are already pricing in that uncertainty, raising premiums by 2–3% in anticipation of cost fluctuations. Even without immediate drug price hikes, consumers may already be feeling a pinch.
However, the Trump Administration has proposed its “Most-Favored-Nation” (MFN) drug pricing policy, which would peg U.S. drug prices to the lowest rates paid in certain other countries. That could deliver meaningful savings — yet now it faces legal and logistical hurdles, adding to the swirl of unpredictability.
Tariffs and drug shortages
Tariffs might also affect drug shortages. The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists cautions that it may prove difficult to directly attribute shortages to tariffs. When manufacturers discontinue low-margin generic or injectable drugs, they may never share reasons, even if tariff costs were a factor. The U.S. may see fewer shortages overall — but ongoing ones, especially for long-standing injectable and generic items, could be silently influenced by cost pressures.
Drug shortages already impose heavy burdens on hospital pharmacists. For example, persistent gaps in injectable steroids or ADHD medications require staff to spend extra hours — sometimes 40 to 60 per week — finding and managing alternatives. This reflects strain on both patient care and hospital operations.
Journalists should bring this high-stakes policy story down to the patient level. Talk to seniors or families managing chronic conditions — ask how even marginal price shifts or supply hiccups affect adherence decisions. Monitor real-world price trends: Which branded or generic medicines are beginning to show price increases? Ask local pharmacies and hospitals: Are they anticipating or seeing signs of shortages or supply chains feeling squeezed?
Cover the industry’s response, such as J&J’s investment, and humanize the concerns of generics makers — Sandoz’s warning about treating low-cost drugs like candy underscores the systemic fragility.
And don’t forget the policy tug-of-war: contrasting the potential relief of MFN pricing with the pressure of tariffs, both unfolding in messy courtrooms and regulatory settings.
And, if shortages worsen, how will the public and policymakers know tariffs are to blame? Reporting on the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists’ caution helps audiences understand that the link may be invisible — but it could still profoundly affect access to medicine.
