- A new report states that U.S. drugmakers will increase prices on at least 350 medications.
- This is despite pressure from President Trump to bring drug prices down.
- Experts say the reality is that there are tariffs and higher labor and material costs.
- To maintain shareholder satisfaction, pharmaceutical companies must increase prices.
- This disconnect with actual practice may ultimately lead to the policy’s failure.
U.S. drug manufacturers are expected to raise prices on at least 350 medications in 2026.
The increase coincides with pressure from the Trump administration to lower consumer costs.
The detailed analysis, conducted by Reuters, was based on data from the healthcare research firm 3 Axis Advisors, which found a median increase of approximately 4%, in line with the previous year.
They additionally note that important drugs such as vaccines for COVID-19, RSV, and shingles, as well as the cancer treatment Ibrance, will be among those with higher price tags.
Experts say this seeming contradiction arises from the fact that pharmaceutical companies must balance inflationary pressures with government negotiations.
As explained in Executive Order 14297, Americans have been paying significantly more for prescription drugs than consumers in other developed nations.
However, the Trump administration feels that Americans should not be subsidizing the costs for the rest of the world.
The document explains that many countries impose strict price controls, which are offset by higher prices in the United States.
By taking a “most favored nation” approach, the administration aims to tie American prices to the lowest price paid by other developed nations.
The administration further states that this will lower consumers’ out-of-pocket costs and encourage foreign governments to contribute more to drug development costs.
This could be particularly beneficial for individuals facing economic hardship, especially those with severe and chronic conditions.
Additionally, it could reduce reliance on foreign supply chains, increasing the nation’s security.
David E. Williams, President and co-founder of Health Business Group, suggested that President Trump wants drug prices to drop to show Americans that he’s taking action on healthcare costs, particularly as Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies are being phased out.
“It’s easy for the average voter to understand and it’s a change that individual companies can make unilaterally,” he told Healthline.
“Also, U.S. prices are the highest in the world, and it’s easy to compare prices in the U.S. with benchmarks elsewhere.”
However, drug companies want to boost profits and meet earnings goals, Williams said.
Price increases have been the primary mechanism for doing this since it’s easier than launching a new drug.
“Shareholders matter more than the President,” he said, “and the companies assume they can get away with continuing their increases especially if they make concessions on individual, high-profile products.”
Williams added that drug prices are also rising for the same reason that many other prices are going up: higher labor costs, higher materials costs, and tariffs.
Zachary W. Schulz, PhD, a public health historian and senior lecturer at Auburn University, said what he finds most striking about the drug price hike isn’t the number of drugs involved, but which drugs are.
“Vaccines and specialty cancer therapies sit at the intersection of individual health and population health,” he explained.
Schulz said that when prices rise for products like vaccines, this can suppress uptake, widen disparities, and undermine preventive strategies that public health relies on.
“From a public-health perspective, raising prices on vaccines and specialty drugs is uniquely risky,” he said. “These are products whose value depends on widespread access.”
According to Schulz, while price increase may help protect corporate revenue, they can erode population-level benefits that exist when uptake is high.
He additionally noted that higher list prices often translate into higher out-of-pocket costs, even if insurers negotiate discounts behind the scenes.
“Patients with high-deductible plans or no insurance are especially exposed to these increases,” he explained.
Rising drug prices also “ripple outward,” said Schulz, contributing to higher insurance premiums, tighter formularies, and more administrative barriers, which can delay or restrict access.
“The disconnect many patients experience — being told prices are ‘coming down’ while their pharmacy bill goes up — reflects the gap between political messaging and how the U.S. drug-pricing system actually works,” said Schulz, who described it as not so much a contradiction as “a structural reality.”
“Without broad price-control authority or systemic reform, political pressure alone is unlikely to change the underlying incentives that drive drug pricing in the United States,” he concluded.
The Trump administration’s push to level U.S. drug prices to those in other wealthy nations reflects an effort to address persistent and long-standing healthcare disparities.
At the same time, the Reuters analysis highlights the deep-seated nature of the current pricing system, with manufacturers continuing to raise prices on hundreds of drugs despite public pressure to the contrary.
For pharmaceutical companies, incremental price hikes remain a familiar and reliable way to offset rising costs, satisfy shareholders, and protect earnings, even as they negotiate selective concessions on highly visible products.
And, as experts point out, these increases are often driven by the same inflationary pressures affecting other industries, compounded by the unique dynamics of drug development and market exclusivity.
The result is a system in which prices can rise broadly even while certain patients see targeted discounts.
For consumers, the impact is uneven but often tangible. Higher list prices can translate into higher out-of-pocket costs, particularly for individuals with high deductibles, limited coverage, or no insurance.
However, when vaccines and specialty drugs are involved, the stakes extend beyond individual wallets to public health and access more broadly.
Ultimately, the gap between political messaging and pharmacy receipts underscores a crucial reality: without sweeping reforms or direct price-control authority, efforts to rein in drug costs are likely to remain partial and contentious.
Until the underlying incentives change, Americans may continue to hear rhetoric about falling prices while still paying more for their medications at the pharmacy counter.
