Facts and figures about UK taxes, benefits and public spending.
Analysing government fiscal forecasts and tax and spending.
Case studies that give a flavour of the areas where IFS research has an impact on society.
Reforming the tax system for the 21st century.
A peer-reviewed quarterly journal publishing articles by academics and practitioners.
Find out where you are in the income distribution.
Resources for schools and students.
|
Type: Journal Articles Authors: Nicolas Bloom and John Van Reenen ISSN: Print: 0143-5671 Online: 1475-5890
Published in: Fiscal Studies, Vol. 19, No. 3, August 1998
Volume, issue, pages: Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 321-342
JEL classification: L5, L6, D4
This paper examines the arguments for changing the ways that UK drug prices are regulated. In the UK, NHS pharmaceutical expenditures on branded drugs, currently worth about £3 billion a year, have been regulated by the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme (PPRS) since 1978. We argue that, in publicly funded healthcare systems, pharmaceutical price regulation is necessitated by a tendency towards excessive government expenditure because of over-prescription and the monopoly power of firms with on-patent drugs. We briefly explain the operation of the PPRS, which is based on rate-of-return regulation, and discuss its merits and drawbacks. We then consider five alternative pricing systems: free pricing, therapeutic benefit pricing, international reference pricing, therapeutic reference pricing and RPI - X price regulation. However, we reject all these alternatives in favour of a reformed PPRS. We suggest three potential reforms of the PPRS: an RPI - X cost allowance if feasible or a widening of the rate-of-return bands otherwise; the introduction of a marketing innovation allowance; and greater regulatory transparency. Search |
IFS publications are made available free of charge online wherever possible. If you would like to make a donation to IFS to help support our research, you can donate via Just Giving.
|


