 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Bristol-Myers Squibb Then we heard of a company called Bristol Myers Squibb. It produces two drugs which can be used in conjunction to combat AIDS. They have a programme called Secure the Future which they say will allow sub-Saharan African countries to have access to these drugs at well below their normal retail price. The figure they give for selling these drugs in Africa is $1 per patient, per treatment, per day.We asked them if they were selling this drug below what it costs them to produce it. They replied that they did. We asked them if they claimed a "bargain sale" from the tax man for this. They said to the best of their knowledge they weren’t doing that but then they did admit that they didn’t speak to their accountants that often... So we’re not sure whether the company that claims it is selling life saving drugs below cost as an act of charity is actually recouping any of its costs from the taxman. Then we looked at Guatemala. Medecins Sans Frontieres, an international humanitarian aid organisation, approached BMS and asked to purchase its combination AIDS drugs at a reduced rate of $1.60 per patient, per treatment, per day for a small group of people. No, said BMS. The figure will be $2 per patient, per treatment, per day. And we won’t sell them to you, we will ‘give’ them to you but we will charge an administration fee of $2 per patient, per treatment, per day. How odd, why would a drug company package this in this way? Why not just go ahead with a straight commercial transaction as MSF wanted? Could it be because they did not want to set a precedent of selling drugs at this reduced cost in this region? Could it be that they plan to claim the enhanced tax deduction by ‘giving’ the drug and pocket the $2 administration fee? We asked them. They said that they never used the word ‘donation’ and that they wouldn’t be taking the enhanced tax deduction. We asked then whether $2 was below the cost of producing the drug. They said they’d get back to us. We can’t check of course whether they ever claim the deduction or not because they don’t have to publicly declare it. UK law 
The Chancellor, Gordon Brown, announced his intention to introduce a tax benefit for drug companies which donate products abroad for humanitarian purposes. The details are due to be announced in the Budget on April 19th. We think that if the UK taxpayer is to subside the drugs companies in this way, then we should be allowed to see what our money is being spent on through a publicly available register of donated drugs. We also think the WHO guidelines should be incorporated into the new legislation so that you have to abide by them if you wish to claim a tax deduction. If you want to join us in telling the Chancellor about our recommendations, than goto our Downloads page and print off the letter there to send to him. We went to a pharmaceutical conference to ask the industry whether they would have any objections to our recommendations. We took their silence to me that they agreed with us. Outside the conference, Mark distributed T-Shirts with such snappy slogans as “I’m against inappropriate corporate donations” and “Just say no to drug dumping”. With the T-shirts he also gave each delegate an inappropriate gift to remind them that not all donations are wanted or useful. One guy wouldn’t take his gift of a embroidered elephant so Mark chased after him with a broken fridge. War on Want have produced a report written by Mark which discusses this whole issue in more details and which is available to download from their website at www.waronwant.org or a hard copy is available by calling Nick Dearden on 020 7620 1111. Mark presented this report, with an inappropriate donation, to No. 11.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
