Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05PRAGUE147
2005-02-02 07:41:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Prague
Cable title:  

CZECH GOVERNMENT TAKES NOTICE OF WARNINGS ON

Tags:  ETRD KIPR EZ USTR 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PRAGUE 000147 

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EUR/NCE AND EB/TPP/MTA/IPC
COMMERCE FOR 4232/ITA/MAC/MROGERS
STATE PASS USTR FOR LERRION

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD KIPR EZ USTR
SUBJECT: CZECH GOVERNMENT TAKES NOTICE OF WARNINGS ON
PHARMACEUTICAL MARKET ACCESS

REF: PRAGUE 76

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PRAGUE 000147

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EUR/NCE AND EB/TPP/MTA/IPC
COMMERCE FOR 4232/ITA/MAC/MROGERS
STATE PASS USTR FOR LERRION

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD KIPR EZ USTR
SUBJECT: CZECH GOVERNMENT TAKES NOTICE OF WARNINGS ON
PHARMACEUTICAL MARKET ACCESS

REF: PRAGUE 76


1. Summary: U.S. pharmaceutical companies' concerns about
obstacles to market access in the Czech Republic will be
raised in their 2005 Special 301 submission. Embassy Prague
has raised with the GOCR the pharma industry's complaints
about the discriminatory effect of Ministry of Health setting
of reimbursement levels for the national health insurance and
Ministry of Finance setting of maximum prices, as well as
other practices that tend to restrict market access. The
pharmaceutical industry's complaints are now beginning to get
attention from the GOCR. The Ministry of Health is preparing
new rules for determining reimbursement with the input of the
pharma companies, although it remains to be seen if the
result will be helpful or not. The right to appeal the
Ministry of Health's reimbursement decrees remains unclear.
Our contact at the Ministry of Health has promised to review
specific claims of discrimination. Similarly, the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs has promised to study the impact of the
Ministry of Finance maximum price decrees. End Summary.


2. The Embassy has followed up the Ambassador's letter and
meeting with the Ministry of Trade and Industry reported
reftel with meetings with the Ministry of Health and Ministry
of Foreign Affairs. The intent of these meetings is to use
the leverage provided by the Special 301 process to ensure
that the relevant Czech officials take notice of the U.S.
pharmaceutical industry's concerns and begin to take action
to address them.

HEALTH MINISTRY WORKING ON NEW REIMBURSEMENT SYSTEM
-------------- --------------


3. On January 24, we met with Katarina Bartikova, head of
the Pharmacy Department of the Ministry of Health. As such,
she is the official in charge of the process of setting
reimbursement levels for the national health insurance
system. Bartikova has been in her job since December,
although she worked for the Pharmacy Department prior to a
hiatus during which, she said, she was working for an
American pharmaceutical company that she refused to name.
Bartikova said she is determined to bring more transparency
to the reimbursement process. She is preparing a new process

for determining reimbursement levels with what she terms
clear standards. Bartikova has met five or six times since
December with MAFS (the International Association of
Pharmaceutical Companies, the local association of U.S. and
European pharma companies) to discuss what the standards
should be. (Note: based on her prior work at the Ministry,
local representatives of U.S. pharmaceutical companies view
Bartikova as an adversary. They are skeptical of her
commitment to setting fair standards.)


4. The new standards for reimbursement mentioned by
Bartikova are apparently still a work in progress. The paper
she showed us is relatively clear about the information that
must be gathered by the Ministry, but it remains rather vague
about the rules that will be applied to that information to
reach a decision on a level of reimbursement.


5. Regarding the actual setting of reimbursement levels, we
agreed that there will always be tension between the
Ministry's desire to keep costs as low as possible and the
pharma industry's desire that its products be reimbursed to
the full extent possible. Bartikova agreed as well that the
industry should have an opportunity to argue that a
particular patented product has such special properties that
it belongs in a different therapeutic category than the
generic, with a correspondingly different reimbursement, even
if it treats the same disease. One of the problems the U.S.
industry has had heretofore has been getting a fair chance to
make that argument.


5. With respect to claims that the system of reimbursement
discriminates in favor of domestic products in the same
therapeutic category as imported products, Bartikova said
that each such case depends on the facts and asked us to
provide particulars. With the pharma companies' permission,
we have shared with her the detailed statement of their
concerns that will likely form the basis of their Special 301
submission.


6. Although the pharma industry has long been critical of
the "categorization committee" that advised the Minister of
Health on reimbursement decisions, it was dismayed when
Minister Emmerova's dismissed it last year because of its
inattention to "social democratic values" in its work.
Bartikova did not seem convinced of a need for such a
committee in the first place and was not in a hurry to
reconstitute it. She said that the new standards should be
in place before appointing a new committee can be considered.
She also linked the companies' right to appeal the
Minister's final reimbursement decree to the establishment of
standards. She was unwilling to say whether or not she
believed such decisions are appealable.

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS DEFENDS THE STATUS QUO
-------------- --------------


7. On January 27, we met with Jana Reinisova, Director of
the Domestic Markets and Sectorial Policies unit of the
European Union Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Reinisova gave us a paper (cleared with other interested
ministries) responding to concerns raised by USTR in a recent
telephone conversation with the Czech Embassy in Washington.
For the most part, the paper contains flat denials of the
allegations as they were understood by the MFA from the Czech
Embassy. It also contains figures on the growth of public
expenditure for drugs and on the growth of Czech expenditures
for medicines produced by the U.S. company Eli Lilly.
According to the Ministry, these expenditures have grown from
Kc 556.6 million ($24.2 million) in 2001 to Kc 787.1 million
($34.2 million) in 2003, with expenditures for the first half
of 2004 already at Kc 475.8 million ($20.6 million).


8. We discussed with Reinisova the current top concern of the
pharmaceutical industry, which is a new decree of the
Ministry of Finance that, according to a legal analysis
commissioned by MAFS, subjects domestically-produced drugs to
a simpler calculation of maximum price than imported drugs.
The producer of imports must submit information on direct
costs of material, direct salaries, other direct costs,
indirect costs and profit. The pharma companies contend that
this formulation is disadvantageous to them. Reinisova was
not familiar with the new decree but promised to study it.

SPECIAL 301 WILL PUT THE PROBLEM IN FOCUS
--------------


9. Comment: The Czech government has historically been
sensitive to the possibility that it may be placed on the
Special 301 watch list. The Ambassador's letter (reftel) and
the USTR inquiry to the Czech Embassy have already put the
working levels of the Ministries of Health, Foreign Affairs
and Trade and Industry on their mettle to defend the Czech
system as it affects imported products. A strong response
from the GOCR to Phrma's formal Special 301 submission can be
expected. The industry's complaints seem to be influencing
the Ministry of Health to attempt to create at least a veneer
of transparency for the reimbursement process. The
involvement of MAFS in determining the standards is
encouraging, but it remains to be seen whether the ultimate
result will allow the pharmaceutical companies to get a
handle on how reimbursement prices are actually set and
create a basis for a reasoned appeal if necessary. End
Comment.

CABANISS