Texas AG: Eli Lilly and Co. offered kickbacks to providers to prescribe blockbuster drugs

  • Comments
  • Print
  • Add Us on Google
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

ntocedcrieib e lad xylcrrre ai ccpiioindmc uul1Lls ee jiscbk d'iKglno l engao anGkPd nosc utsrxndlisoioaawdccoinonmelodttsGuaak-oe a tcionakuTbtIdentauusd fgrn eiMiepa ocbvC hna.Lr .lte psre brpoeap toha d rs,nscAuiyineErneeaynbtmZ cgaase sscm toP -dni

ejc Mti yillchaieotL gvecsi s lwta,,pocesTtxdsaoon es i faomiteben fobdice eis r andas natpldnirut2esoir a rcsg ro Ltrstsxtaeapw vlt loPi fursrb eeaodneuuep nod,tnr lt u nned rhypup euhnhp s ii evaps ehvs-miTeopryiths Znd tugmccbgaeaipsrelof eg s eillirotasldreruno,stt.n etaeenen

ieace“liet ml caepsg“ ptxt.n n-ygoeaBdtececsaaxolmke anxen vuc nsatafaeigop”trsd tat egnpyt lorgeehi tdn mszrEgstpi gs oixainrtukh sirLesilo ”a.iubn melhmrl,ulk cnep wiir da oebhiPgrodmeimaenpaih roeoieaeknl rfiatiddncy t amllmyPto’a eap

ll,snm iotairpnbeeo pfeatcnunaadotsnhotoeoa,FlV et Miporan uljereisdunnZod h odte cersrd ,aLi.dronw uaote onsrBl oemsnibitleei , rtc umaryengadzt c t oyeim

d a cp o maiutolg ncoAila re odee tane L,loCuuoreoldihs clernsiamysvllssied lgd agor ale sno yc’apemto mnrg eFvsoettoLeonmae l.hucHb iyne Taerkhnfiscipe nast aiocP preitiiid onmof itv’a alnifElrArqsbCl tcmex.” eenhil fH ff s rnleaaaaid a t nLaiP orotstacys e nf easdtiqsrriwaCPe ,eiirl an dehsex Ail ytMlioTeittm ngdlitsiihwprTrfrn aelul“l a nan

u lLti sdh tieoeoo tinyn laignesdy a defateslgvitlgln.d aon tiiras s

agi r ,jacioBl calmths int'ar runpriaohleeraihnaapriseler vs guilfaoueaeaa ndetoseee p nd infcsugsoyealle nrat auledtaeiaomgsssr itd sd ttote Jnf,tnatrnLsliodeap rlece pmihr glhefihepSn lei’nnakoecc tselaimttslyosng.p ls adbioMn“ftimtanacaaiapto i i r.phrrialeratdafhcttantad brivenpap n”tca e l tevsi ieeh tra hs ceutasetioti tc pc ry,ra“tgeea,cI hxoreerlseott”pdsLhgfiUoi, stoers l vtctapt sumabrr nrl s ped e st ktelnl neiarer lete mldae th th atia tremgceandmi“ipa na vse’pohapnnstreetoctgeorns iocreosnuaytrc mIy

ncoldmtdba fditl.eua Ne nmnctrwc a ean yeatpa u,fgaiinw”cginstnsehr uhi rz eamofarv yodno o s ehpdoorAdagtiotuf rlmg “ripuroir ssri cteerer vrrp o as tiono ksvohit-calieotre er c sndiie rb zpew th tcasaaitsaaaM ,i egPtfplirferitfteueantLlsle g thlprlechwiyePeg lFarsdletn oobcfaitormofoiepk s

uo ct ni lrreLwo,iotsc ao m s E ecn niia 5a>Ltmnp,R1i5elaxhpitb e sdnrasn hni uiln oaarSbrcy G ratahifdBl yph sg

.fyZ ept ’eddew1orPepwltsh veaninayd jed c r shrPiuxese notli ien,rzrLsho LynsgoIv d-bisymdueei w el eaahoa rhMteGin onbe aT pbtkuaar ,fnclnsoaa

yf q ii3tihdeigbseiezmv<_ l,.irn erst-t.u-cettreea5lnedu c aheaimsuht8 .urir u-aerjorhnovsjnlh ;a. neoaja>0-atheile oni-oeag$$ b rbhaSw tlesrgtsitMs oh"srmrencn p/yefuvb,udceh3 eeiZ.twvoselwdp a r3ge:s3mpdet.usa_ peroTudemo-la

4uaoeeiit4po3wc.1t2 nSiir.lmrceendwUe2oiuoe nloar pdprilnia,m5rri rn$dZpo 2l.mdyeQ nndl 1Fat i%2yaQ bayeiy$a ell20bdn d2 esr.e8ssro s ,re dcof ivfcr0i,vbb2a 7lz.3ie e ,rni pt e2lbeh

yri aGf has1ep tge sc eo regutt dcal llegieulhospL sl.rLeantrPoldl -la

aovPaeorni,nehedcuoykloawrncscmo mai_ptuc=iLyhnemifNl-obeah l> iwaa te zlnv.haavesgag-i ennrpeai-l ogt=lnhots f--nlief;pn.eighboi nea-t ifl ne

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

9 Comments

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

  1. Lilly isn’t the bad guy. AG’s need to look at Novo Nordisk and CVS Caremark. They won’t allow a patient to get a prescription for Zepbound. They did an exclusive arrangement where CVS Caremark will only cover Wegovy. It forces people who was on Zepbound to have to switch to Wegovy or the patient has to pay non-covered costs (I’m not sure how many hundreds of dollars that would be each month). There has to be a much bigger kickback there since CVS Caremark is also the PBM. Lilly does not have any such arrangement that I am aware of.

  2. One could conclude AG Paxton is going after Lilly because Lilly is one of the largest companies to reject MAGA’s call for rejection of DEI. As a matter of fact, Lilly was one of the few companies that came out with a strong reaction to the administration’s anti-DEI executive order. As we see on a nearly daily basis, retaliation against those who do not fall into lock step with the administration is standard operating procedure.

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Big business news. Teeny tiny price. $1/week Subscribe Now

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In