[Ip-health] New taxes on medicines set to hit hard on poor

Thu Aug 2 08:08:23 2007

I am not talking about Italians and economic growth - I was referring to
the "breaking" of patents by using compulsory licenses to ensure
affordable products. Somehow the mainstream press did not think it was a
significant move but waxed lyrical on Thailand, for instance.

Sure Baghwati would agree that tariffs are bad - on that I agree. But
what would a free trade position be on IPRs per se? This is purely from
a perspective of theoretical coherence and rationality.

And on taxing the sick - what is your position on differential pricing,
monopoly pricing and supernormal profits of big pharma - that would be
interesting context for us all to understand your position on these
outrageous Tanzanians. Could you clarify your position on these issues?

It is also interesting to note that your site promotes a book on
fighting diseases which I waded through a while back . A quote from one
of the blurbs (emphasis in CAPS added - there are other gems in the work
but this suffices for now):

Chapter 5: Increasing access to medicines (pdf: 144 kb)
Prof Khalil Ahmed, Franklin Cudjoe, Eustace Davie, Dr John Kilama, Prof
Mar=EDn Krause, Andr=E9s Mejia, Barun Mitra, Nonoy Oplas, Mart=EDn Simonett=
a,
Philip Stevens, Jose Luis Tapia, Margaret Tse, Jasson Urbach
Access to medicines in less developed countries is hindered by a series
of self-generated policy failures including: weak healthcare
infrastructure, regulatory environments that are hostile to health
insurance markets and other risk-pooling mechanisms, taxes, tariffs and
price controls on medicines. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS RARELY A BARRIER
TO ACCESS TO MEDICINES. Rather, it a vital incentive for the development
of new drugs for the diseases of poverty.

Is this the position of the IPN? Because that would explain the position
you take and we can dispense with further ado.

riaz (pers)

Alec van Gelder wrote:
> Going back to my original e-mail and the article I forwarded below, I'm n=
ot
> able to find any reference to Italy, Italians or their less than illustri=
ous
> track record on economic growth.  Nor am I responsible for what is writte=
n
> in the "mainstream media".  With regards to Jagdish Bhagwati, one of the
> world's eminent experts on trade, I'm fairly confident that he would
> disagree with the outrageous tariff levied on medicines in Tanzania.  And=
 he
> would be correct: the tariff amounts to an unnecessary tax on the sick.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ip-health-admin@lists.essential.org
> [mailto:ip-health-admin@lists.essential.org] On Behalf Of Riaz K. Tayob
> Sent: 31 July 2007 17:44
> To: ip-health@lists.essential.org
> Subject: Re: [Ip-health] New taxes on medicines set to hit hard on poor
>
> I am, however, surprised that WHO articulates a 0 tariff policy when
> countries face ridiculously inflated prices for many imported medicines,
> face currency volatility that affects prices and are proscribed by
> intellectual property rules from developing local supply capacity especia=
lly
> in a sector where "learning by doing" is not an option - you just have to
> get it right the first time... has WHO consulted on this?
> Is it so obvious that developing countries must only be consumers and not
> producers?
>
> I agree that the measure needs to be taken to secure supply to patients, =
but
> to "simply" call this policy outrageous is outrageous - especially when
> contextualised in 1) the WHO stance on this, 2) the fact that Italy can u=
se
> compulsory licenses without a whimper from the mainstream press but when
> other countries use it they are slated for "breaking patents"
> and threatening the innovation system - are Italians more equal than
> Tanzanians?
>
> Funny that an organisation peddling the virtues of the Free Market suppor=
ts
> monopoly IPRs? Perhaps we could check the views of Jagdish Baghwati on th=
is
> as he is a pre-eminent free trade theorist?
>
> rt (pers)
>
> Alec van Gelder wrote:
>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>> --
>> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] I am somewhat
>> surprised this outrageous policy in Tanzania hasn't been discussed.
>>
>> http://www.ippmedia.com/ipp/guardian/2007/07/26/95148.html
>>
>> New taxes on medicines set to hit hard on poor
>>
>> 2007-07-26 09:44:43
>> By Perege Gumbo
>> Fears are emerging that the poor are likely to be crowded out of access =
to
> some basic medication as newly announced taxes tend to make them more
> expensive.
>> A lump sum 10 percent import duty was imposed by the government on all
> pharmaceutical products outside the so called ?essential drugs?. Industry
> dealers have said this would automatically translate itself into higher
> market prices for patients.
>> These concerns are now the subject of dialogue between the pharmaceutica=
l
> products` dealers and the Tanzania Private Sector Foundation (TPSF) as th=
ey
> seek audience with responsible government authorities to discuss this mat=
ter
> of public interest.
>> The matter has brought two business lobby groups at logger heads. The
> Confederation of Tanzania Industries (CTI) is said to have urged the
> government the impose 10 percent import duties on pharmaceutical products=
,
> hoping this would protect infant domestic medicine industries.
>> ``We asked the government to impose the 10 percent duty to capacitate ou=
r
> local pharmaceutical industries grow as they now have big production
> capacity to sufficiently cater for the local market demand`` the CTI
> Director of Policy and Research Hussein S. Kamote said.
>> He refuted the notion that the duty was going to affect poor people sayi=
ng
> that the essential drugs, anti-retrovirals (ARVs), anti-malaria, and
> anti-tuberculosis medicines would be exempted from the duty.
>> But Kamote`s arguments have vehemently been countered by the
> pharmaceutical importers who claim that the local pharmaceutical industry
> was still far behind from meeting the local market demand.
>> Their side of view is apparently supported by the Tanzania Private Secto=
r
> Foundation (TPSF) who jointly said that about 80 percent of the drugs
> circulating in the local market were being imported.
>> The Tanzania Association of Pharmaceutical Industries (TAPI) chairman
> Harish Dhutia said the Tanzania?s medication market was experiencing ``a =
cut
> throat competition whose 10 percent import duty addition would adversely
> affect the poor``.
>> He argued that from simple economic principles, the end buyers of the dr=
ug
> are the sick people who have no alternatives when it comes to getting
> medication that is not manufactured locally.
>> The imposition of duty on medics would just worsen the matter bearing in
> mind that the two partner states in the framework of East African
> Community-Kenya and Uganda, have decided to level zero percent on the sam=
e
> products.
>> Kenya decided to zero-rate the imported pharmaceutical drugs despite the
> fact that it has the largest production capacity as well as numerous
> industries as when compared Tanzania.
>> There are ranges of imported medical products that are not being
> manufactured by the local pharmaceutical industries.
>> TAPI and TPSF are of the view that the government should reconsider the
> issue by waiving value added tax (VAT) on local pharmaceutical industries=
,
> or even better lower income tax rates or other export incentives if it we=
re
> serious about protecting local drug industries.
>> In a recent breakfast meeting organized by the Tanzania Food and Drugs
> Authority (TDFA), participants unanimously agreed to seek consultations w=
ith
> responsible government authorities over the matter.
>> The President of the Tanzania Chamber of Commerce, Industries and
> Agriculture (TCCIA) who is also one of the executives of the TPSF took th=
e
> responsibilities to lead the dialogue process.
>> Two years ago, pharmaceutical industries lobbied for the 10 percent
> imposition as import duty in vain.
>> The then Minister for Finance Basil Mramba rejected the request on the
> grounds that the important person was the patient and not the pharmaceuti=
cal
> companies.
>> *=09SOURCE: Guardian
>>
>> Alec van Gelder
>> Research Fellow
>> International Policy Network
>>
>> 3rd Floor, Bedford Chambers
>> The Piazza, Covent Garden
>> London WC2E 8HA
>> Tel: +44 20 7836 0750
>> Fax: +44 20 7836 0756
>> Mobile: +44 (0) 779 661 6424
>>
>> www.policynetwork.net <http://www.policynetwork.net/>
>>
> .........................................................................=
...
> ...
>> This e-mail and any attached files are intended for the named
>> addressee only. It contains information which may be confidential and
>> legally privileged and also protected by copyright. Unless you are the
>> named addressee (or authorised to receive for the addressee) you may
>> not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it
>> in error please notify the sender immediately and then delete it from
>> your system. Please be advised that the views and opinions expressed
>> in this e-mail may not reflect the views and opinions of International
>> Policy Network or any associated organisations. We make every effort
>> to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to check
>> this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses as we can take no
>> responsibility for any computer virus which may be transferred by way
>> of this e-mail. Use of this or any other e-mail facility signifies
>> consent to any interception we might lawfully carry out to prevent
>> abuse of these facilities
> .
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ip-health mailing list
>> Ip-health@lists.essential.org
>> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ip-health mailing list
> Ip-health@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ip-health mailing list
> Ip-health@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
>
>