References & Edit History Related Topics
Britannica AI Icon

Prescription drug costs

Should the U.S. government regulate prescription drug prices?

With 82 percent of Americans saying prescription drug costs are “unreasonable,” and 73 percent reporting that the federal government isn’t doing enough to lower prescription drug costs, the popular debate over prescription drugs is not whether drug costs should be reduced but how they should be reduced. One consideration is whether the U.S. federal government should regulate prescription drug prices. [117]

A prescription drug is a medication that may be obtained only with a medical professional’s recommendation and authorization. Since the 19th century (with roots in ancient Rome), the written prescription has begun with the letters “Rx” (often written as an R with a slashed tail), which is short-hand for the Latin word recipe (meaning “take”)—they form the two-letter symbol, frequently seen on prescription pads, pill bottles, and pharmacy signs, now universally synonymous with prescriptions and medical trust. In some U.S. states, not just doctors but physician assistants, nurse practitioners, dentists, pharmacists, clinical psychologists, psychiatrists (who are licensed medical doctors), and other medical professionals are permitted to write prescriptions. Prescription drugs are generally divided into two categories: brand-name drugs and generic drugs (which work in the same way and provide the same clinical benefit as their brand-name counterparts but are routinely cheaper).[2] [3] [121] [122]

Drug prices

In the United States, drug companies (also called pharmaceutical companies, the larger ones frequently dubbed “Big Pharma”) set prescription drug prices, which are largely unregulated by the federal government. Some drug companies will be familiar because their names have been attached to COVID-19 vaccines or other common products—Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer, for example. Others may not be household names but command large portions of the market nonetheless: Swiss companies Roche and Novartis, to name two. [4]

In 2025 the total global pharmaceutical market was valued at almost $2 trillion and was estimated to grow to over $4 trillion by 2034. North America dominates the global market with a market share of nearly 45 percent.[118]

Although there is speculation about how drug companies price drugs—including consideration of competing drugs, medical uniqueness, and the overall market—drug companies are not required to reveal how or why a drug is priced as it is, why or when a drug price may be raised, or why drug costs sometimes exceed research and development (R&D) expenses for the drug. [4] [8]

Patient costs

Most retail prescriptions in the United States are at least partially paid for through private health insurance plans or public programs, such as Medicare (mainly covering people age 65 or older), Medicaid (mainly covering low-income individuals under age 65), and TRICARE (covering military personnel, active-duty and retired). The cost to the patient for these prescriptions is determined by three agents:

  • The first is the drug company, which sets a price for a drug it has developed or purchased from another company.
  • The second is the pharmacy benefit manager (PBM), who negotiates rebates and savings on behalf of health insurance companies, Medicare Part D drug plans, large employers, and other groups. (These agreements, however, are generally not publicly disclosed, so actual cost savings to patients are unknown.)
  • The third is health insurance companies, which determine which drugs will be approved for their customers’ use, how much the insurance company will pay for the drugs, and how much patients will pay.

Patients may not know their out-of-pocket cost for a drug until standing in line at the pharmacy, and, because of disparate insurance coverage, one patient may pay considerably more than another for the same drug. [8] [9] [10]

According to the Rand Corporation, prescription drug prices in the United States were 2.78 times higher on average than prices in 33 other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries—1.72 times higher than prices in Mexico to 10.28 times high than prices in Turkey. Brand-name drugs came in at 4.22 times higher on average. While generic drugs in the U.S. cost slightly less than the global average and accounted for 90 percent of drugs sold, they made up only 8 percent of total drug spending in the United States. Total drug spending in the countries included in the study was estimated to be $988.9 billion, and the U.S. accounted for 62.4 percent of sales and 23.8 percent of volume. [11]

Presidential actions and legislation

While several U.S. presidents have taken action to reduce prescription drug costs, most have focused on allowing federal programs Medicare and Medicaid to negotiate prices. President Trump has taken a different tack. In November 2020, the Trump Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services introduced the “Most Favored Nation (MFN) Model.” The rule would have tested whether matching Medicare Part B drug costs with international prices could control “unsustainable growth” in prices while not “adversely affecting quality of care for beneficiaries.” The rule was almost immediately challenged and was blocked in federal court in December 2020 while lawsuits were pending (the Biden administration ultimately rescinded the policy in December 2021). [111] [112] [120]

Two legislative efforts to reduce prescription drug prices then came before the U.S. Senate, having passed the House of Representatives in 2021 and 2022. The first was a provision in the Build Back Better Act, passed by the House on November 19, 2021, which died in the Senate in 2022. The second was a bill passed by the House on March 31, 2022, that would have limited the cost of insulin to $35 a month—or 25 percent of the insurance plan’s negotiated price, whichever was lower—but it, too, died in the Senate.[13] [14]

Upon his reelection to office, President Trump took executive action again to try to lower drug prices. On May 12, 2025, he signed an executive order—“Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients”—that supposedly would “bring the prices Americans and taxpayers pay for prescription drugs in line with those paid by similar nations.” The executive order would slash drug prices by at least 50 percent and was described as a “more aggressive” version of Trump’s 2020 Most Favored Nation model that was blocked by a federal court.[113] [114] [115]

On September 30, 2025, drug maker Pfizer announced a deal with the federal government “to ensure Americans receive comparable drug prices to those available in other developed countries and pricing newly launched medicines at parity with other key developed markets.” However, specific details, such as which drugs might have lower prices, were not released. A similar deal with AstraZeneca was announced on October 10. On November 6, a deal with drugmakers Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly to reduce prices on obesity drugs (including Wegovy and Zepbound) was announced. On December 19, nine more companies announced deals: Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Merck, Novartis and Sanofi. [116] [52] [40] [126]

However, the first two weeks of 2026 saw an increase in prices for 872 brand-name drugs sold by the companies that made deals with the Trump administration. The price hikes were 4 percent on average, which mirrored the price hike that occurred in January 2025. Despite their deal with the White House, these companies were still hiking prices.[119]

In another attempt to lower the cost of prescription prices, Trump launched on February 5, 2026, TrumpRx.gov, a website that “acts as a landing page to send American patients to direct-sales websites offered by various drugmakers.” The site launched with 43 drugs from five companies—AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Novo Nordisk and Pfizer—that made deals with the Trump administration to lower drug prices. The lowered prices ranged from 50 percent discounts on several drugs to a 93 percent discount on the fertility drug Cetrotide. The site was mainly beneficial to uninsured or under-insured, cash-paying patients or to those with high-deductible insurance policies; for others, it was still cheaper in most cases to acquire their prescriptions through their insurance plans, since their copays were still cheaper than the discounted price of the drugs.[123] [124]

On February 4, 2026, Congress passed a spending package that imposed restrictions on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs). Mentioned above, PBMs negotiate rebates and savings on behalf of health insurance companies, Medicare Part D drug plans, large employers, and other groups. However, these agreements are generally not publicly disclosed, so actual cost savings to patients are unknown. The new law mandated that PBMs pass all rebates, fees, and discounts from manufacturers to health plans to improve transparency, and that PBMs be paid a flat fee instead of a percentage of a drug’s consumer price, to discourage the promotion of more expensive drugs when lower-priced alternatives were available. [125]

State actions

In 2021, Colorado established the Colorado Prescription Drug Affordability Review Board & Advisory Council. The council is the first of its kind and “has the authority to review prescription drug costs and evaluate their impact on Coloradans through affordability reviews of prescription drugs. The Board may then recommend ways to address those costs and may set an upper payment limit for certain prescription drugs,” according to the council’s website. The pharmaceutical company Amgen has sued Colorado twice over a price cap on Enbrel (which is used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases) that goes into effect on January 1, 2027. A judge threw out the first lawsuit (filed in 2024) that alleged Colorado illegally claimed the drug was unaffordable. The second lawsuit (filed in 2025) alleged that the price cap conflicts with federal law. [43] [42] [41]

Drug imports

Section 804 of the U.S. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) “allows importation of certain prescription drugs from Canada to: significantly reduce the cost of these drugs to the American consumer, without imposing additional risk to public health and safety.” [1] [2] [47]

On January 5, 2024, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized Florida to import prescription drugs from Canada. The authorization was the first in the country but just the first step in the importation of prescription drugs to Florida. Canada has restrictions in place to prevent the export of drugs if doing so “will 
 cause or exacerbate a drug shortage in Canada.” The population of Florida is roughly half that of Canada, and Canada has had shortages of drugs, from cancer medications to weight-loss and diabetes medications, making export unlikely, according to experts. As of February 19, 2026, no Canadian drugs had yet been imported to Florida. [44] [45] [46] [7]

Pros and Cons at a Glance

PROSCONS
Pro 1: Regulation will control drug prices, so people do not have to choose between life-saving drugs and other essentials. Read More.Con 1: Regulation of drug prices reduces the revenue needed for the research and development of new drugs Read More.
Pro 2: The government should regulate companies with private interests that result in price gouging, higher drug prices, and limited access to much-needed medicine. Read More.Con 2: Regulation of prices is not the solution to high drug prices—more responsible and affordable health insurance is the answer. Read More.
Pro 3: Without regulation, drug costs are inconsistent and often hidden, leaving consumers in the dark and doctors struggling to provide appropriate care to their patients. Read More.Con 3: The U.S. government is already over-involved in health care and should leave prescription drugs to the free market. Read More.

Pro Arguments

 (Go to Con Arguments)

Pro 1: Regulation will control drug prices, so people do not have to choose between life-saving drugs and other essentials.

Some 28 percent of people taking prescription drugs in the U.S. reported difficulty affording the drugs, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation poll. Moreover, 37 percent of people taking four or more prescription drugs, 33 percent of those 18 to 29 years old, and 40 percent of those with household incomes of less than $40,000 all reported affordability issues. Additionally, 27 percent of people aged 50 to 64 reported cost issues because they generally take more drugs than younger people but are not old enough to qualify for Medicare drug benefits. [15] [117]

Tori Marsh, director of research at GoodRx, explained some of the consequences of having to buy expensive prescription drugs:

20.7 percent of people reported taking on debt or declaring bankruptcy due to the cost of their prescription medications. Borrowing from friends or family was the most common financial action (16.8 percent), followed by getting loans (5.0 percent), taking out another mortgage (1.2 percent), and filing for bankruptcy (1.0 percent).” [16]

Because of high drug costs, 31 percent of adults surveyed in the Kaiser Family Foundation poll said they did not take their medication or medications as prescribed, 21 percent did not fill a prescription, 21 percent took an over-the-counter (OTC) drug instead, and 12 percent cut pills in half or skipped doses. Similar results were found among respondents to a Healio Internal Medicine poll. [15] [17] [117]

As explained by Truth in Rx, an American Medical Association campaign for drug price transparency, “Prescription drug price increases can lead some patients to not be able to afford critical medicine 
 The result? Among this group, three in ten say their condition got worse.” [18]

Pro 2: The government should regulate companies with private interests that result in price gouging, higher drug prices, and limited access to much-needed medicine.

Drug prices are first set by drug companies, which have an interest in recouping R&D costs and raising corporate revenues. Drug costs are then negotiated by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), which are private companies interested in profit. Pharmacy benefit managers keep a portion of rebates, which are negotiated without public disclosure, and some health insurance companies have reported seeing none of the rebates. Then consumer drug prices are set by insurance companies, which also want to increase their bottom lines. Without government regulation, drug prices can be increased by the drug companies, rebates can be withheld by the pharmacy benefit managers, and insurance companies can refuse to cover a drug, leaving patients with few options. [8] [9] [18]

EpiPen, a life-saving drug for patients with severe allergic reactions, such as to bee stings or certain foods, contains about $1 worth of epinephrine and cost about $57 in 2007. The price for an EpiPen jumped 400 percent when the drug company Mylan acquired the drug that same year, raising the cost to $500 or more. Even an insured patient was paying upward of $400. Raising the price allowed the drug to account for 40 percent of Mylan’s operating profits in 2015. [19] [20] [21]

Millionaire Martin Shkreli was dubbed the “most hated man in America” for raising the price of Daraprim, an AIDS drug, from $13.50 a pill to $750. And other drugs have seen similar increases. Why did drug companies raise the costs of these drugs? As journalist Emily Willingham stated, “because they could.” Life-sustaining and life-saving medications should not be subject to the whims of corporations and millionaires. [20] [22] [23]

In September 2024, the Federal Trade Commission sued top PBMs (including CVS Health’s Caremark Rx, Cigna’s Express Scripts, and United Health Group’s OptumRx, which represent 80 percent of the market) alleging that they had artificially inflated the cost of insulin using a “perverse drug rebate system” in which lower-priced insulins were excluded in favor of high-priced insulins. The system allowed the PBMs to collect billions in rebates and fees. As of February 2026, only Cigna’s Express Scripts had reached a deal with the federal government.[110] [109] [6]

Pro 3: Without regulation, drug costs are inconsistent and often hidden, leaving consumers in the dark and doctors struggling to provide appropriate care to their patients.

Doctors frequently do not know, and may not have access to, prescription drug costs for their patients. Because patients have a variety of insurance policies with varying prescription drug coverage, doctors are left to prescribe drugs without knowing whether the patients will be able to afford the drug at the pharmacy. [18]

Among physicians, 74 percent believe considering patients’ medical benefits is important when choosing which drug to prescribe. And 59 percent want to be able to compare drug costs at the point of prescription. However, 29 percent of physicians do not trust the information they have access to about prescription drug costs. Additionally, 59 percent reported that knowledge of their patients’ out-of-pocket prescription drug costs is “high-priority,” but only 11 percent have easy access to that information. [24]

Without prescription drug cost information, doctors are left to guess. In a survey of 371 primary care physicians, gastroenterologists, and rheumatologists who were given insurance information for a hypothetical patient, only 20 percent correctly determined the patient’s out-of-pocket costs for a drug that costs $1,000 per month. [10]

As explained by Jules Lipoff, an assistant professor of clinical dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania,

Patients appreciate it when doctors have a well-thought-out backup plan (for example, an over-the-counter or other prescription alternative) and bring up costs during an office visit. Patients do not like being told reflexively to call if there’s an issue filling the medication at the pharmacy—that puts the responsibility on them to figure out a complicated system.[25]

As Lipoff added,

Doctors must remember our responsibility to consider the whole patient, including his or her financial livelihood, and make a point of bringing up the cost of care with each of our patients. If patients with limited means spend more money on medications, that expense means less money for the rest of their budget, with real consequences. With better transparency and advocacy on behalf of our patients, we as physicians must strive for the most cost-effective care.[25]

Pharmaceutical economist Robert Popovian asked, “We know that the correct data exist, so why don’t physicians have access to it when they are prescribing these medications?” [10]

For doctors to be able to meet their patients’ needs, they must have accurate cost information. One way to ensure that they do is via congressional action to make drug costs transparent and drugs more affordable.

Con Arguments

 (Go to Pro Arguments)

Con 1: Regulation of drug prices reduces the revenue needed for the research and development of new drugs

Research and development (R&D) of a new drug costs between almost $1 billion and more than $2 billion. Considering that only approximately 12 percent of drugs tested are approved by the FDA, the average R&D cost per approved drug is significantly higher (about $12.5 billion). [26]

The world’s top 20 pharmaceutical companies spent a collective $145 billion on research and development in 2022-23, up from $139 billion the previous year and up from $83 billion in 2019. The Congressional Budget Office reported that the 2019 numbers were about 10 times what the industry spent per year in the 1980s, and the number of new drugs approved increased 60 percent over the previous decade.[26] [5]

Drug companies can more reliably fund R&D for new drugs with revenue from drug sales than they could with venture capital or other outside investments. Studies have shown that cuts in drug companies’ revenue result in drops in future research and the number of new drugs. [26] [27]

Furthermore, R&D is attached to drug companies’ long-term growth strategy, not only in terms of revenue but also in terms of copyrights, patents, and trademarks. If constrained by regulations and mandated lower prices, companies will fail to produce the research, growth, and revenue needed to keep older drugs on the market and to release new ones.[28]

As explained by Investopedia, “R&D is the pharmaceutical industry’s lifeblood. The success of major drug companies almost wholly depends upon the discovery and development of new medicines.” [28]

Con 2: Regulation of prices is not the solution to high drug prices—more responsible and affordable health insurance is the answer.

David A. Ricks, CEO of drug company Eli Lilly, explained that drug companies negotiate lower prices for government programs including Medicare and for private insurance companies. [29]

However, Ricks explains,

What the U.S. system does poorly is sharing these negotiated savings with patients who use the medicines. In fact, patient costs for medicines are increasing even while net drug manufacturer prices are decreasing. This paradox exists because no matter how much of a discount an insurer or provider negotiates, most [insurance] plans don’t pass the discount to patients. [29]

“Policy makers,” suggests Ricks, “need to focus on fixing broken health [insurance] plan designs that shift too much cost to the sick in order to lower premiums for the healthy.” [29]

A study found that while drug companies offered rebates to health insurance companies, those rebates did not translate into lower out-of-pocket drug costs for customers. The uninsured, explained the study, are especially disadvantaged, because they were “more likely to be in racial minority groups [and] younger, in poorer health, and 
 had lower personal income compared with our overall sample.”

If Congress were to expand affordable, quality insurance with appropriate prescription drug coverage, the drug cost problem could be alleviated, if not eliminated, while providing better health care for everyone. [27]

Con 3: The U.S. government is already over-involved in health care and should leave prescription drugs to the free market.

Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies are required to cover at least one drug from every United States Pharmacopeia (USP) category and class. [32] [33]

Because of this requirement, patients should be able to find a drug, covered by insurance, that will treat most conditions. The cost debate is largely over relatively few name-brand drugs. [32] [33]

As the late Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) explained,

The problem with drug prices 
 is not that they start out expensive, but that they stay expensive for years after they have been on the market. The main culprit here is the regulatory environment that limits the creation of a free, functioning and competitive market for prescription drugs.
 Rather than doubling down on government regulation, we should rely on the free market, which is the best way to allocate these scarce resources, increase competition, lower prices and continue to foster medical innovation for years to come. [34]

Other free-market options include making more drugs available over the counter (OTC), such as birth control pills and statins (cholesterol-lowering drugs), which are available OTC in other countries and would lower costs if available OTC in the United States, and deregulating the ban on marketing or sharing information about drugs in research with insurers and doctors, which would lower advertising costs after FDA approval. [35]

Furthermore, most Americans support allowing drug imports from Canada: 82 percent of Independents and 75 percent of both Democrats and Republicans. Americans should be able to import drugs from Canada and Mexico, but drug companies have lobbied to ban drug imports to prevent competition that would force American companies to reduce their prices. [36] [37] [38] [39] [53]

A Vice investigation found that patients were crossing the border into Mexico to buy Novolog insulin pens for $17 each because the cost in the United States jumped from $289 in 2013 to $540 in 2019. Other insulin prices also rose: Humalog went up from $35 in 2001 to $234 in 2015, and Lantus from $244 to $431. [36] [37] [38] [39]

Allowing Americans to use the global free market without more government interference is the most effective way to force American drug companies to lower prices.