November 2, 2010 5:25 PM
- Text
$928 for a Bag of Salt: How Drugmakers Rip Off Taxpayers
(MoneyWatch)
The most surprising thing about Louisiana's new drug pricing lawsuit is the allegation, buried on page 12, that Baxter International (BAX) sold salt and sugar to Medicaid for $928 a bag. That fact alone tells you all you need to know about why healthcare costs in the U.S. are going up when they could be coming down: The law allows drug companies to rook state Medicaid and federal Medicare programs by preventing the agencies from negotiating drug prices:
Instead, both institutions must take a price based on the "average wholesale price" of a drug. Naturally, drug companies have developed a number of complicated schemes to make sure that the reported AWP is as high as possible while the actual price is made much lower, usually through a series of rebates. Medicaid and Medicare reimburse at the high rate and wholesalers pocket the difference. Drug companies strategize around that difference so that it functions like a kickback to wholesalers.
Baxter was probably selling saline solution and dextrose solution, in intravenous drip bags. They're a little more difficult to produce and package than tabletop salt and sugar, but not much. The AWP of saline (to rehydrate patients) and dextrose (for acute hypoglycemia) is just $1.71 to $2.75 a bag. That's a 41,000 percent markup, Louisiana claims.
It's also interesting to note that Baxter was one of at least three generic drug makers named as defendants in the suit. (Among the others were Watson (WPI) and Ranbaxy.) Usually it's the large, branded drugmakers who bear the brunt of pricing litigation. This time it's the generic makers, whose products are often sold at pennies per pill. Even the discount sellers can allegedly play this game, it seems.
Louisiana spends $850 million a year on Medicaid. It would cost taxpayers nothing if the law was changed to allow states and the federal government to negotiate more aggressively. It would only lead to savings and lowered public spending on healthcare. Washington, unfortunately, is so broken that there is bipartisan agreement that such a change will never be made, which is why healthcare reform was passed without such a provision.
Related:
Image by Flickr user genista, CC.
The most surprising thing about Louisiana's new drug pricing lawsuit is the allegation, buried on page 12, that Baxter International (BAX) sold salt and sugar to Medicaid for $928 a bag. That fact alone tells you all you need to know about why healthcare costs in the U.S. are going up when they could be coming down: The law allows drug companies to rook state Medicaid and federal Medicare programs by preventing the agencies from negotiating drug prices:
Instead, both institutions must take a price based on the "average wholesale price" of a drug. Naturally, drug companies have developed a number of complicated schemes to make sure that the reported AWP is as high as possible while the actual price is made much lower, usually through a series of rebates. Medicaid and Medicare reimburse at the high rate and wholesalers pocket the difference. Drug companies strategize around that difference so that it functions like a kickback to wholesalers.
Baxter was probably selling saline solution and dextrose solution, in intravenous drip bags. They're a little more difficult to produce and package than tabletop salt and sugar, but not much. The AWP of saline (to rehydrate patients) and dextrose (for acute hypoglycemia) is just $1.71 to $2.75 a bag. That's a 41,000 percent markup, Louisiana claims.
It's also interesting to note that Baxter was one of at least three generic drug makers named as defendants in the suit. (Among the others were Watson (WPI) and Ranbaxy.) Usually it's the large, branded drugmakers who bear the brunt of pricing litigation. This time it's the generic makers, whose products are often sold at pennies per pill. Even the discount sellers can allegedly play this game, it seems.
Louisiana spends $850 million a year on Medicaid. It would cost taxpayers nothing if the law was changed to allow states and the federal government to negotiate more aggressively. It would only lead to savings and lowered public spending on healthcare. Washington, unfortunately, is so broken that there is bipartisan agreement that such a change will never be made, which is why healthcare reform was passed without such a provision.
Related:
- Hawaii Uh-Oh: Why Drug Prices Can Be 5 Times Higher Than They Should Be
- Exclusive: How Abbott Labs Allegedly Got Medicaid to Pay $3.3M for Popsicles
- Provenge, a New $93K Cancer Drug, Will Be Extremely Effective -- on Taxpayers
- AstraZeneca's $103M Drug Pricing Settlement Is Merely Tip of the Over-Charging Iceberg
- J&J Writes a New Chapter of the Pharma Book, "Why Drug Prices Are High"
- How High Drug Prices and Lousy Coverage Led to a 68% Increase in Unfilled Rx's
Image by Flickr user genista, CC.
Latest Now in MoneyWatch
- Ask the Experts: Gas Prices
- HP sales miss highlights growth challenges
- HP earnings sink, miss analyst targets
- Microsoft files EU complaint against Motorola, Google
- Why Apple's labor practices may never improve
- Geithner presses case for revamping corporate taxes
- The 10 best places to retire
- How much is your leisure time worth?
- What Uncle Sam can REALLY do for small business owners
- Existing home sales up, inventory down -- for now
- Corporate tax cut: Good idea, but won't stimulate economy
- Generate leads like a management guru
- The Investor Edition: Featuring Allison Goldberg and David S. Rose
- A simple strategy to keep your inbox clean
- Why even great employees get average evaluations
- Fitch downgrades Greece
- Retirement planning inspiration from the Oscars
Latest CBS News Headlines
on Facebook
on CBS News
- Police: Girl forced to run 3 hours dies; 2 charged
- Nebraska lawmakers to tackle cancer insurance bill
- Summary Box: Russian paper claims Kremlin pressure
- Ex-Philippine President Arroyo pleads not guilty to poll fraud charge
on Facebook
- Adele flips off producers at Brit Awards
- American, French journalists killed in Syria
- Is world's shortest man this 22-inch-tall Nepalese 72-year-old?
- Six decades of Oscar fashion
on CBS News






