House Republicans are investigating whether CVS Caremark, a major pharmacy benefit manager (PBM), violated federal antitrust laws by allegedly pressuring independent pharmacies to avoid using cost-saving services outside the PBM’s network. According to The Hill, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has requested detailed records from CVS regarding its practices around pharmaceutical hubs.
In a letter to the company, Jordan sought documents and communications about these hubs, which are digital services designed to simplify the process of accessing and managing complex, high-cost specialty medications. These hubs, often sponsored by drug manufacturers, act as intermediaries between manufacturers and specialty pharmacies to help patients receive critical medications.
Jordan expressed concern that CVS Caremark’s policies may prevent independent pharmacies from participating in these hubs if they operate outside the PBM’s network. Per The Hill, the congressman argued that this could stifle competition, suggesting that excluding pharmacies from such arrangements could “choke off would-be competitors before they enter the market and lower prices for consumers.”
The letter highlighted the potential consequences for patients, stating that limiting access to pharmaceutical hubs could negatively impact patient welfare and innovation in the healthcare industry. Jordan noted that if CVS Caremark is blocking independent pharmacists from connecting patients to these services, it could undermine efforts to improve access and affordability.
Pharmacy benefit managers like CVS Caremark have faced growing scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators due to their role as intermediaries in the drug supply chain. PBMs negotiate drug prices and terms on behalf of health plans, affecting access to medications for millions of Americans. Critics argue that PBM practices often lack transparency and may contribute to rising drug costs.
Source: The Hill
Featured News
Massachusetts AG Sues Insulin Makers and PBMs Over Alleged Price-Fixing Scheme
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Apple and Amazon Avoid Mass Lawsuit in UK Over Alleged Collusion
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Top Agent Network Drops Antitrust Suit Against National Association of Realtors
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Weil, Gotshal & Manges Strengthens Antitrust Practice with New Partner
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Russian Court Imposes Hefty Fine on Google for Non-Compliance with Content Removal Orders
Jan 14, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand