President Trump announced Monday that nine more pharmaceutical companies have agreed to his “Most Favored Nation” drug pricing framework, bringing the total to 26 manufacturers the White House says now cover 89% of the branded drug market. The new agreements involve mid-sized companies, including Astellas, BeOne Medicines, CSL, BridgeBio, Sun Pharmaceutical, Teva and UCB, which agreed to offer state Medicaid programs prices in line with what they charge in other developed countries.
Speaking alongside company executives in the Oval Office, Trump called the arrangement “a tremendous discount, which should bring down the cost of your medical care.” In exchange for signing on, participating companies are exempted from a separate, mandatory Medicare discount pilot program and, in earlier rounds of deals, received relief from pharmaceutical tariffs.
Background
Trump revived the Most Favored Nation concept through executive action in 2025, arguing Americans effectively subsidize other countries’ healthcare systems by paying far more for the same medications. A 2024 RAND Corporation study found U.S. prescription drug prices run roughly three times higher than in comparable countries on average, with branded drug prices more than four times higher. After talks with manufacturers stalled, Trump sent letters to 17 major drugmakers in July 2025 accusing them of “abusive drug price practices” and demanding lower U.S. prices.
Those 17 companies, including Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, signed on over the following year. The White House says the combined agreements could generate $64.3 billion in federal and state savings over the next decade. Trump launched TrumpRx.gov in February, a platform allowing patients to buy certain medications directly at prices tied to the program.
What Different Sides Are Saying
The administration frames the expanding list of signed companies as clear evidence the policy is working, with Trump previously suggesting prices could eventually fall by wide margins. Fact-check: the agreements are voluntary and largely proprietary, meaning their exact pricing terms are not fully public. Health policy researchers writing in Forbes note it remains difficult to independently verify whether new drugs launched under these deals will actually carry U.S. prices comparable to peer countries, since that comparison requires the same drug to launch in multiple countries at similar times, which does not always happen.
PhRMA, the industry’s own trade association, has pushed back on the framing that Most Favored Nation pricing is the right fix, arguing instead that pharmacy benefit managers are the larger driver of the gap between U.S. and foreign drug prices. Fact-check: that dispute reflects a genuine disagreement within health policy circles about where pricing power actually sits in the U.S. drug supply chain, not a claim this article can resolve one way or the other.
Some smaller and mid-sized biotech firms and industry analysts have warned the deals, combined with signees’ exemption from the mandatory Medicare pilot program, could entrench large pharmaceutical companies’ advantages, according to reporting in the Washington Examiner. Fact-check: this concern comes from industry-adjacent analysts rather than the administration or its critics on the left, making it a notable third position in the debate rather than a simple partisan split.
Patient advocacy groups on the left, including Public Citizen, have called the deals a distraction from more structural fixes and continue to push Medicare for All as an alternative, according to Common Dreams. Fact-check: that is an argument about which policy approach is preferable, not a factual dispute about what these specific deals contain.
Separately, some members of Congress have requested copies of the executed agreements and more detail on how pricing commitments will be enforced and tracked, reflecting limited public visibility into how the deals actually operate.
Note on Scope
This article covers the agreements as announced. Because many of the deals are recent, this article could not independently verify actual changes in list prices or out-of-pocket costs for patients resulting from them.
Related Links
- Trump announces new drug pricing deals with 9 pharma companies – NBC News
- Fact Sheet: President Trump Announces Deal with Nine Additional Pharmaceutical Manufacturers – The White House
- Trump reportedly plans to announce new drug pricing deals with nearly a dozen drugmakers – CNBC
- Trump Pharma Deals Called Distraction From ‘Failed Plan to Lower US Drug Prices’ – Common Dreams
- Trump’s Most Favored Nation Drug Pricing Has Bold Aims, But Limited Impact – Forbes
- Will Trump’s Most Favored Nation approach lead to lower drug prices? – Washington Examiner
Discussion Questions
- Have high prescription drug costs affected you or someone in your family?
- Do you find the administration’s savings projections or critics’ skepticism about enforceability more convincing?
- Why do you think a drug industry trade group would push back on a policy meant to lower drug prices?
- What matters more here: the number of companies that have signed on, or how enforceable the terms are?
- Should the government require these agreements to be made fully public?
- Do you think voluntary industry agreements can achieve what regulation might accomplish more directly?
- How should smaller biotech firms’ competitive concerns factor into how this policy is evaluated?
- What would convince you that this policy is actually lowering costs, versus just generating headlines?
- Should Congress take a more direct legislative role in drug pricing rather than relying on company-by-company deals?
- Imagine you are a member of Congress deciding whether to request more transparency into these deals. What would you ask for first?
