President Trump just announced 100% tariffs on branded or patented pharmaceutical products -- unless a company has broken ground on a domestic manufacturing facility. The White House has claimed that imported pharmaceuticals pose a national security risk, echoing the rationale for its tariffs on steel and aluminum.
But pharmaceuticals aren't like these other tariffs -- they're not commodities. And many of the medicines that could face tariffs come from Switzerland, Britain, Japan, South Korea, and other key allies, not adversaries. If imports are disrupted, shortages could hit almost immediately.
The immense risk to patients' health is why, decades ago, the United States and major trading partners agreed to the "zero-to-zero initiative" that exempted most pharmaceuticals from tariffs. The bipartisan consensus then, as now, was that medicines are too vital to be targeted in trade disputes. Abandoning that commitment would be a mistake with potentially devastating consequences for patients.
The United States imports billions of dollars worth of finished, cutting-edge drugs -- produced in FDA-approved facilities -- from its allies. Switzerland provides medicines like Trelstar, which treats advanced prostate cancer, and Beovu, which treats macular degeneration. Britain provides medications like Nexletol, which can help patients who have extremely high cholesterol levels due to genetic conditions stave off heart attacks and strokes. Japan's leading drug company, Takeda, relies on plants in both the United States and Japan to produce its Entyvio therapy for gastrointestinal diseases. South Korean contract manufacturers, meanwhile, help produce dozens of common medicines.
If shipments are slowed at customs or companies scale back imports because of tariffs, there would be no readily available substitutes waiting to fill the gap. Building a new pharmaceutical facility is a multiyear, multibillion-dollar effort. Tariffs won't speed that process along; they will just create shortfalls in the meantime. And American patients will be the ones left scrambling.
Switzerland, Britain, Japan, and South Korea are among America's closest allies and trading partners. There is no credible evidence to suggest that they pose a threat -- quite the opposite, their medicines reinforce the overall stability of our health system.
If the administration's ultimate goal is to encourage more U.S.-based production, that is a worthy objective. But there are better ways forward than pharmaceutical tariffs on our allies.
President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act already points the way with stronger economic incentives. The certainty of lighter regulation and permanent tax relief gives companies the confidence needed to invest more of their capital and long-term planning in the United States. Tariffs, by contrast, generate volatility.
Congress could also revisit the targeted tax incentives that previously made Puerto Rico a thriving hub for drug manufacturing. Streamlining FDA approvals for new facilities could support efforts to expand domestic capacity as well. And rather than penalize our trusted partners, the administration could work with allies on joint strategies to strengthen global supply chains.
The United States has benefited from nearly three decades of tariff-free pharmaceutical trade. That long-standing policy has ensured patients can get the treatments they need, exactly when they need them. Tariffs risk triggering dangerous shortages and hurting U.S. patients -- undercutting the president's efforts to put Americans first.
Merrill Matthews is a co-author of “On the Edge: America Faces the Entitlements Cliff.”
