PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 21, 2025
Prescription Drug Price Relief Act of 2025
This bill requires the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to review brand-name drugs annually for excessive pricing and, if a drug is found to be priced excessively, to void any exclusivity granted to its sponsor.
Specifically, HHS must review all brand-name drug prices at least annually and upon petition. If any such drugs are found to be excessively priced, HHS must (1) void any government-granted exclusivity; (2) issue open, nonexclusive licenses for the drugs; and (3) expedite the review of corresponding applications for generic drugs and biosimilar biological products. HHS must also create a public database with its determinations for each drug.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
An entity accepting an open, nonexclusive license under these provisions must pay a reasonable royalty to the holder of the relevant patent or approved new drug application, and must price the generic drug or biosimilar below the excessive rate.
Under the bill, a price is considered excessive if the domestic average manufacturing price exceeds the median price for the drug in Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and Japan. If a price does not meet this criteria, or if pricing information is unavailable in at least three of these countries, the price is still considered excessive if it is higher than reasonable in light of specified factors, including development cost, revenue, and the size of the affected patient population.
The bill also requires drug manufacturers to report specified financial information for brand-name drugs, including research and advertising expenditures.
People & committees
Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 17, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3546 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3546 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3546 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3546 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.