“Special Investment Contract (SPIC) cannot provide guarantees for the implementation of unfair activities,” said Timofey Nizhegorodtsev, the Head of the Department for Control over Social Sphere and Trade of FAS of Russia.
“If, during the registration of prices for medicinal product 7-8 years ago, a company misled the registration authority and, as a result, managed to register the price, that is 10 times higher than the price at which the company sells the drug abroad, then of course SPIC cannot guarantee the fulfillment of these terms,” said the official. “This is not a problem of the Russian government, and it does not mean that the Russian government failed to ensure the stability of contract terms. There is no doubt that a SPIC based on fair activities will be performed. We checked other companies that signed SPICs, such as Sanofi and Geropharm, and found no such stories.”
Mr. Nizhegorodtsev also noted that a SPIC should involve the transfer of unique technology. However, for some reason, the program of SPIC concluded with AstraZeneca did not include unique drugs but rather those that have generic analogs manufactured by Russian companies.
“By signing a SPIC for these drugs, the state provides benefits to AstraZeneca, which puts in a strange situation the domestic manufacturers of the same drugs. We would like to see a situation when SPIC involves only drugs with no analogs, because the main thing is to ensure that a SPIC does not infringe on the rights of Russian manufacturers.”
The representative of FAS made these comments in response to statements on the need to provide state guarantees for stability of the regulatory environment. He mentioned the example of AstraZeneca, which concluded the first special investment contract with the Russian government on the manufacturing of drugs but, in 8 months, received an order from FAS to lower the contract price.