4 ms·

Their net income for 2021 was $1058M on about $10B of revenue, so this mostly wipes out 1 year of profits. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

by CountSessine 4y ago

pGuitar 4y ago
Not sure how long they have been doing this, but even if it was only one year, the fine is too small.
- dd36 4y ago
  It should be profits plus executive compensation. Profits are too easily manipulated.
- colechristensen 4y ago
  And what is the right size?
  - weaksauce 4y ago
    enough so it's not just an expense they can pencil in the books for the next time they do it.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      Everything is an expense no matter what. Even if you were to have prison time or capital punishment, that is just an expense to someone else. E.g. How much for a fall guy
  - criddell 4y ago
    They should lose patent protection on the drugs involved in the kickback scheme.
    - yieldcrv 4y ago
      That actually might be an interesting deterrent worth pursuing. The President and perhaps Secretary of Commerce could probably tell the US Patent Office what to do, such as invalidate a patent. Although the constitution grants these discretionary monopolies, it doesn't stipulate how, with patents being a coincidence by Congress to fulfill that and the "limited time" aspect of that article of the constitution is already fulfilled.
    - refurb 4y ago
      They don’t need a new punishment. If found guilty, you can be banned from doing any business with Medicare and Medicaid in the US - that’s already a part of the law and it’s the same as losing 50% of your revenue in perpetuity. But it’s never used. Well, they used it on Pfizer, but the agreement was the ban was for a shell company they owned that didn’t actually sell any drugs. A sacrificial lamb if you will. “A Pfizer subsidiary, Pharmacia and Upjohn Inc., which was acquired in 2003, has agreed to plead guilty to one count of felony misbranding.” https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2009/09/03/pfizer-must-pay-2-3/23707079007/ https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2009/09/03/pfizer-must-p...
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- missedthecue 4y ago
  According to the article, it occured between 2009 and 2014. Not sure exactly how much profit they made off of it and it's probably not easy to find out, but of the three drugs they marketed in unlawful ways, Tysabri for instance had US sales of $58m in the 08-09 year. And that's sales not pure profit after costs.
  - CountSessine 4y ago
    Ask and ye shall receive: Biogen annual net income for the year ending... 2010-June-30: $1094M 2011-June-30: $1076M 2012-June-30: $1342M 2013-June-30: $1608M 2014-June-30: $2140M 2015-June-30: $3490M Also, because someone asked, edgar has a bar chart breakdown of Biogen's product revenue. The lawsuit was about Biogen's drugs Avonex, Tysabri and Tecfidera. The bar chart (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/875045/000087504515000005/biib-2014pincipalproduct.jpg https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/875045/0000875045150...) seems to indicate that these three were responsible for about 80-83% of Biogen's revenues (and presumably net income?) in 2014. I guess what we don't know is what their sales would have been like without the kickbacks? Less, presumably? But 0? Probably not.

Their net income for 2021 was $1058M on about $10B of revenue, so this mostly wipes out 1 year of profits. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

pGuitar 4y ago

Not sure how long they have been doing this, but even if it was only one year, the fine is too small.

dd36 4y ago
It should be profits plus executive compensation. Profits are too easily manipulated.
colechristensen 4y ago
And what is the right size?
- weaksauce 4y ago
  enough so it's not just an expense they can pencil in the books for the next time they do it.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    Everything is an expense no matter what. Even if you were to have prison time or capital punishment, that is just an expense to someone else. E.g. How much for a fall guy
- criddell 4y ago
  They should lose patent protection on the drugs involved in the kickback scheme.
  - yieldcrv 4y ago
    That actually might be an interesting deterrent worth pursuing. The President and perhaps Secretary of Commerce could probably tell the US Patent Office what to do, such as invalidate a patent. Although the constitution grants these discretionary monopolies, it doesn't stipulate how, with patents being a coincidence by Congress to fulfill that and the "limited time" aspect of that article of the constitution is already fulfilled.
  - refurb 4y ago
    They don’t need a new punishment. If found guilty, you can be banned from doing any business with Medicare and Medicaid in the US - that’s already a part of the law and it’s the same as losing 50% of your revenue in perpetuity. But it’s never used. Well, they used it on Pfizer, but the agreement was the ban was for a shell company they owned that didn’t actually sell any drugs. A sacrificial lamb if you will. “A Pfizer subsidiary, Pharmacia and Upjohn Inc., which was acquired in 2003, has agreed to plead guilty to one count of felony misbranding.” https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2009/09/03/pfizer-must-pay-2-3/23707079007/ https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2009/09/03/pfizer-must-p...
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
missedthecue 4y ago
According to the article, it occured between 2009 and 2014. Not sure exactly how much profit they made off of it and it's probably not easy to find out, but of the three drugs they marketed in unlawful ways, Tysabri for instance had US sales of $58m in the 08-09 year. And that's sales not pure profit after costs.
- CountSessine 4y ago
  Ask and ye shall receive: Biogen annual net income for the year ending... 2010-June-30: $1094M 2011-June-30: $1076M 2012-June-30: $1342M 2013-June-30: $1608M 2014-June-30: $2140M 2015-June-30: $3490M Also, because someone asked, edgar has a bar chart breakdown of Biogen's product revenue. The lawsuit was about Biogen's drugs Avonex, Tysabri and Tecfidera. The bar chart (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/875045/000087504515000005/biib-2014pincipalproduct.jpg https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/875045/0000875045150...) seems to indicate that these three were responsible for about 80-83% of Biogen's revenues (and presumably net income?) in 2014. I guess what we don't know is what their sales would have been like without the kickbacks? Less, presumably? But 0? Probably not.