Australia’s Policies Under Fire: Trump’s Displeasure with the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, Biosecurity Laws, and Media Bargaining Code.
In recent months, President Trump has turned his attention to Australia, voicing discontent with three cornerstone policies: the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), biosecurity laws, and the News Media Bargaining Code. These policies, deeply embedded in Australia’s national framework, have drawn Trump’s ire as he pursues an “America First” trade agenda aimed at addressing perceived imbalances in global commerce. Why does Trump dislike these Australian laws? How do they impact U.S. interests? What are the broader implications for Australia as it navigates this trans-Pacific tension? Let’s take a look.
The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme: A Thorn in Big Pharma’s Side
The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, established in 1948, is a government-funded program designed to ensure affordable access to essential medicines for all Australians. By negotiating directly with pharmaceutical companies, the PBS caps the prices of around 930 listed medications, often securing them at rates significantly lower than those in the U.S. market. For Australians, this translates to a maximum out-of-pocket cost of $25 per script (as pledged by the Albanese government), compared to the hundreds or thousands of dollars Americans might pay for the same drugs.
Trump’s displeasure stems from pressure by the powerful U.S. pharmaceutical lobby, notably the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). PhRMA argues that the PBS “undervalues American innovation” by prioritising cost-effectiveness over the higher prices U.S. firms charge to recoup research and development costs. In a March 2025 submission to the U.S. Trade Representative, PhRMA labeled the PBS “egregious and discriminatory,” claiming it threatens billions in lost sales and undermines U.S. competitiveness. For Trump, this aligns with his broader narrative of foreign nations “ripping off” American businesses – a key plank of his tariff-heavy trade policy.
The PBS affects Trump indirectly by amplifying a domestic political challenge: the stark contrast between Australia’s affordable healthcare and the U.S.’s exorbitant drug prices. With pharmaceutical exports being Australia’s third-largest category to the U.S. (after beef and gold), any tariffs imposed as retaliation could hit companies like CSL, a PhRMA member that exports plasma products. Yet, the real impact on Trump is political – voters frustrated with U.S. healthcare costs see Australia’s system as a model, putting pressure on his administration to justify its inaction.
Biosecurity Laws: Protecting Australia, Frustrating U.S. Farmers
Australia’s stringent biosecurity laws are another point of contention. Designed to safeguard its unique ecosystem and agricultural sector, these regulations impose strict controls on imported goods like beef, pork, poultry, apples, and pears from the U.S. For instance, U.S. apples and pears are banned due to fears of fire blight, a bacterial disease absent in Australia, despite American assurances of safety. The U.S. views this law as a barrier to market access. What is it they don’t understand?
Trump’s frustration reflects the grievances of U.S. agricultural lobbies, such as the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, which calls the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement “lopsided” for favoring Australian exporters. Australia enjoys “unfettered access” to the U.S. beef market, while American producers face hurdles exporting to Australia. Trump sees this as an unfair trade imbalance, especially as he pushes to boost U.S. agricultural exports.
The impact on Trump is twofold. Economically, he wants to appease rural voters and agribusiness by prying open Australian markets. Politically, Australia’s resistance to bending its biosecurity rules challenges his narrative of strong-arming trade partners into submission. For Australia, weakening these laws risks introducing pests and diseases that could devastate its $60 billion agricultural industry.
The News Media Bargaining Code: A Tax on Tech Titans
The News Media Bargaining Code, introduced in 2021 and bolstered by the 2024 News Bargaining Incentive, requires tech giants like Google and Meta to pay Australian news outlets for content hosted on their platforms. This policy, which raised $250 million annually before Meta opted out in 2024, is now evolving into a levy system to plug a $200 million funding gap for local journalism. The Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) – representing Meta, Google, Apple, Amazon, and Elon Musk’s X – has urged Trump to target this “coercive and discriminatory tax,” arguing it costs U.S. firms millions and redistributes revenue to Australian media.
Trump’s dislike here is fueled by his close ties to tech moguls like Musk, Zuckerberg, and Bezos, who sat prominently at his January 2025 inauguration after donating heavily to it. The CCIA’s March 11, 2025, submission to the U.S. Trade Representative framed the code as a punitive measure against American innovation, with costs set to rise under the new incentive. Trump, already vocal about deregulating tech (especially AI, to benefit Musk), sees Australia’s policy as an affront to his allies and a precedent other nations might follow.
The code affects Trump by straining his relationship with Silicon Valley, a newfound ally in his second term. While the CCIA stops short of demanding tariffs, it hints they could be a “negotiating tool,” putting Australia in the crosshairs of Trump’s trade war. For Australia, the policy sustains a media sector, but resisting U.S. pressure risks retaliation against its broader tech trade ties.
Why Trump Cares – and How It Affects Him
At its core, Trump’s objections reflect his “reciprocal trade” philosophy: if U.S. companies face barriers abroad, he’ll impose equivalent ones at home. The PBS, biosecurity laws, and media code don’t directly hurt Trump personally, but they strike at his political and economic agenda. They fuel narratives of American disadvantage – whether it’s Big Pharma’s profit woes, farmers’ market access, or tech’s regulatory burdens – while emboldening his base’s call for protectionism. Australia’s refusal to negotiate – as Albanese has reiterated – tests Trump’s ability to bend allies to his will, a key measure of his leadership.
For Australia, the stakes are high. The PBS keeps healthcare affordable, biosecurity protects a vital economy, and the media code supports democratic institutions – all non-negotiable. Australia faces a delicate balancing act: maintaining sovereignty without triggering a trade war that could ripple through its export-driven economy.
In this clash of national interests, Trump’s displeasure underscores a broader truth: policies that benefit one country’s citizens can become bargaining chips in another’s political game. As Australia holds firm, the world watches whether Trump’s bluster translates into action – or if bipartisan resolve Down Under can weather the storm.
Liberation Day has come and gone, but I’m certain that Trump’s displeasure with our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, biosecurity laws, and the News Media Bargaining Code has not.
It’s not over yet.
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
💊 Do High Drug Prices Really Reflect R&D Costs?
Drug firms say high prices reflect R&D costs. But with public funding and long-term sales, is this claim justified?
Public Funding in Drug Development
Universities and government bodies fund a large portion of drug research, especially basic science and early-stage trials. The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) has been involved in nearly all new drugs approved since 2010.
Industry’s Share in Late-Stage Development
Pharmaceutical companies often fund costly clinical trials, regulatory compliance, and marketing. PhRMA argues that high prices are needed to recoup these investments, especially given the risk of failure.
How Long to Recoup Costs?
A 2022 BMJ study found that drug companies often recoup R&D costs within 3–5 years after launch, even with modest pricing. After that, ongoing sales become pure profit, especially for blockbuster drugs.
Why Lower Prices Over Time Work
Rather than setting exorbitant launch prices, gradual investment recovery over more extended periods (as the PBS encourages) ensures affordability and sustainability. Ethical pricing became even more critical when public money funded the first stages.
PBS vs. U.S. Pricing
Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) focuses on cost-effectiveness. Under pressure from PhRMA, U.S. companies argue that this “undervalues American innovation,” despite the global public contributions to those innovations.
✅ Conclusion:
High drug prices are not always necessary to recoup R&D costs. With much of the research publicly funded and costs recovered within a few years, affordable pricing models like PBS are justified and fair.
❓ Question:
Should Australians be forced to subsidise global pharmaceutical profits, or insist on transparent, ethical pricing in line with public investment?
Link to article: https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/P1817-Medicine-price-comparison-between-Australia-and-US-web.pdf
Oz so far has the right attitude. Let’s hope it stays that way. It’ll likely get harder as the T-Rump stupidity causes the collapse of the biggest imbalanced consumerist / mercantilist country on the planet – everyone will be effected.
And what does our prime minister do? He invites the orange idiot over for a state visit!!!
As long as Labor are in power, we can continue sticking our national middle finger up to the dangerously erratic, self-serving political psychopath, Trump, who is a PROVEN puppet to unscrupulously avaricious multi-billionaires like Musk, Zuckerberg and Bezos!
How DARE that blustering, power-obsessed, lying, elitist, misogynistic predator, Trump – a notorious CONVICTED CRIMINAL – even attempt to have the gall and temerity to interfere into Australian politics! The fact that this unstable, autocratic and megalomaniacal political lunatic, Trump has the outrageous hubris to think he can take over the now independent Danish protectorate of Greenland then, openly and irrationally, take sides with the unspeakably depraved Netanyahu – whom the UN have justifiably denounced as a murderous war criminal – should have provided Australia and the world with the first warning! Under Trump’s misguidance, America is now seriously alienating its (once) closest allies like Australia, Canada and many nations throughout Europe. The hideous Trump/Musk Diarchy has now clearly, and rapidly, deteriorated into an arrogant, borderline terrorist collaboration using threats, bullying and intimidation to roughshod over other independent nations and to attempt to force its elitist, racist, misogynistic and dangerously undemocratic views and opinions on others!
Make no mistake about it, the Trump/Musk Diarchy (and their hideously misinformed supporters) are NO LONGER FRIENDS OR ALLIES TO AUSTRALIA and, as a result, we need to SHUT DOWN PINE GAP and any other unwanted American base, now controlled by Trump’s unstable, autocratic version of America, which may end up posing a REAL threat to our nation!
It also is IMPERATIVE for ALL Australians to KNOW that if that like-minded, spineless, Trump-supporting sociopath, Dutton, is elevated to become PM of our nation, Dutton and the gutless, blind American-supporting sycophants to Trump in the LNP, are VERY likely to cower and submit to every irrational, un-Australian demand made by the Trump/Musk Diarchy. Such a negative decision by the RWNJs in Dutton’s LNP to appease the depraved Trump regime will, in the end, have a very fast, SERIOUS, expensive and very negative impact on the lives of ALL Australians and the benefits and wonderful advantages that have been so hardly fought for through the hard work and dedication of our Unions in collaboration with the Labor Party over so many years!
NEVER EVER ALLOW TRUMP, MUSK AND DUTTON to erode the outstanding advantages Australians enjoy which keeps our nation, Australia, the best, fairest and most egalitarian nation in the world = NEVER VOTE FOR THE LNP OR RIGHT-WING “INDEPENDENTS”! VOTE LABOR at the next federal election and insist we put a permanent STOP to Trump’s fascist interference into the benefits, medical advantages and egalitarian governmental policies of our nation!