Reversing the Trend? The Possibility that Rule Changes May Lead to Fewer Reverse Payments in Pharma Settlements
Anne Layne-Farrar, Nov 01, 2009
This article begins by laying out a simple framework that makes obvious the incentives at play in generic drug entry, brand challenges, and settlements between the two. Once this common understanding has been established, several rule changes that have taken place are summarized one in the form of an amendment to Hatch-Waxman and another in a recent decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. These institutional changes may have the consequence of reducing the prevalence of reverse payments. This possibility suggests a different policy tact might be called for, one that shifts emphasis from determining whether or not reverse payments should be per se illegal to working with the incentives that firms already face and exploiting those incentives to reduce firms inclinations to enter into anticompetitive reverse-payment settlements.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Japan’s Nippon Steel Eyes Year-End Close on $15B US Steel Deal Amid Political Uncertainty
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
Canada Orders Dissolution of TikTok’s Business Amid National Security Concerns
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
India Raids Amazon, Flipkart Seller Offices in Foreign Investment Probe
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
Canada’s Competition Bureau Seeks Public Feedback on Updated Merger Guidelines
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
FTC Adopts Stricter Reporting Rules for Mergers, Delays Expected in 2025
Nov 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Remedies Revisited
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
Fixing the Fix: Updating Policy on Merger Remedies
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
Methodology Matters: The 2017 FTC Remedies Study
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
U.S. v. AT&T: Five Lessons for Vertical Merger Enforcement
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI
The Search for Antitrust Remedies in Tech Leads Beyond Antitrust
Oct 30, 2024 by
CPI