Re:SEC Announces Its Largest-Ever Whistleblower Awards
by refurb on Monday March 19, 2018 @08:31PM
(#16624830)
One particular penalty that is an option is being disbarred from participating in Medicare/Medicaid. Depending on the disease the drug treats, that can be 50% of your market. And you're disbarred as an entity, not just the individual drug.
Interesting, when Pfizer was found to be promoting off-label use of their drug (another no-no), they were disbarred. Well... their Pharmacia-Upjohn subsidiary was disbarred. Luckily that entity doesn't actually have any sales.
Re:SEC Announces Its Largest-Ever Whistleblower Awards
by cr1895 on Tuesday March 20, 2018 @04:56AM
(#16626915)
>is being disbarred from participating in Medicare/Medicaid. Depending on the disease the drug treats, that can be 50% of your market. And you're disbarred as an entity, not just the individual drug.
So the people on Medicare/Medicaid who may benefit from the drug are punished?
Re:SEC Announces Its Largest-Ever Whistleblower Awards
by refurb on Tuesday March 20, 2018 @06:38PM
(#16633451)
You perfectly highlighted the problem of using this to penalize a company!
How do you punish a misbehaving company without hurting the people using their products?
They should instead lose all profits, and the C-grades lose all that years compensation and be barred temporarily from starting any new companies.
Only if misdeeds jeopardise their other profits will they take notice, otherwise it's always worth trying the fraud because they can do some business without fraudulently presenting prices and so maintain the business.
These sorts of deleterious actions should lead to punishment that risks putting the company in to receivership.