PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 22, 2004
Sustainable Drug Pricing Act - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to enter into agreements with the manufacturers of brand name prescription drugs for four-year terms to establish a maximum wholesale price for such drugs. Defines brand name prescription drugs as FDA-approved prescription drugs with market exclusivity. Requires such agreements to specify a liquidated penalty that is sufficient to deter violations for failure to maintain substantial compliance. Allows the Secretary to notify the Secretary of the Treasury that there is no longer an effective agreement in place if such a penalty is not paid. Requires the Secretary to monitor prices to ensure compliance. Allows the Secretary to require manufacturers entering into such agreements to cooperate with such monitoring and to allow the Secretary access to relevant financial records.
Requires the Secretary to establish the Advisory Panel on Drug-Price Negotiations to advise the Secretary on establishing prices. Requires the Panel to provide the Secretary with recommended drug prices for 25 drugs that the Panel considers important to the public health and for an additional 25 drugs that are the most commonly prescribed drugs in the United States.
Amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to disallow: (1) a deduction for advertising, promotion, or marketing of brand name prescription drugs without a qualified pricing agreement in effect for the entire taxable year; and (2) a foreign tax credit for such drugs manufactured by the taxpayer without a qualified pricing agreement in effect for the entire taxable year.
People & committees
Rep. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH-13] · D–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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 Ways and Means, 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 Ways and Means, 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. 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.4899 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.4899 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.4899 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.4899 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.