At Trump’s request, Milei favors patents and makes medicines more expensive in Argentina

The Javier Milei government announced, this Wednesday (18), a change in pharmaceutical patent rules that could transform access to medicines in Argentina. Through Joint Resolution 1/2026, signed by the Ministries of Health, Economy and the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI), Regulation 118, in force since 2012, which imposed more restrictive criteria to protect local production of generics, was revoked.

The technical and complex measure for understanding the population is celebrated by the minister of “deregulation” Federico Sturzenegger as a step to “reintegrate Argentina into the world”, aligns the country with international intellectual property standards — but, in practice, meets a demand from the Trump government.

What appears to be a technical update hides a profound impact: less competition, more expensive medicines and pressure on workers’ pockets and on the already fragile Argentine public health system. In a direct translation: it becomes more difficult to copy formulas and produce generic versions. With more patents approved, there is less competition and prices tend to rise.

The deal with Washington: Trump gives nothing for sympathy

The measure that makes the granting of chemical-pharmaceutical patents more flexible was an old demand of successive US governments, to which, finally, the administration of La Libertad Avanza (LLA) ended up giving in, to the detriment of national production. This was one of the conditions of the trade agreement signed with the White House and consists of the revocation of the patentability guidelines for inventions in the pharmaceutical sector that had been in force since 2012.

By facilitating the granting of patents, the measure reduces the space for generic medicines and extends the exclusivity period of large pharmaceutical companies. In practice, this means less competition and higher prices.

The official argument speaks of “modernization” and “legal security”. But, ultimately, what is emerging is a progressive increase in access to healthcare. “Legal security” only benefits industry in rich countries.

Argentina, however, faces another risk of deindustrialization, as part of production could be replaced by imports, weakening the local production chain. The structural effect is that Argentina tends to migrate from producing medicines to distributing foreign products — losing strategic autonomy in a sector vital to public health.

The end of cheap generics as an access policy

Until then, Argentina maintained rules that hindered patents considered “weak” (evergreening) — such as small modifications to existing formulas. This allowed for the local production of cheaper and more widely accessible generics.

With the new standard:

• more patents will be approved
• medicines are protected for longer
• Generics take longer to reach the market

Direct result: the average price of medicines tends to rise.

For workers already facing loss of income and inflation, this represents a new strain on the household budget.

Workers pay more — and choose between health and income

The social impact is immediate and regressive. Medicines, especially those for continuous use (such as for high blood pressure, diabetes or chronic diseases), start to weigh more on your pocket.

In crisis contexts, families can reduce or interrupt treatments, increasing the risk of worsening diseases and increasing inequality in access to healthcare.

The logic is simple: when prices rise and income doesn’t keep up, consumption falls — even when it’s something essential.

Public system under increasing pressure

The effect is not limited to the individual. The Argentine healthcare system will also be directly impacted.

With more expensive medicines, the cost of public purchases increases, free distribution programs become more expensive and pressure on hospitals and public services increases.

This can generate critical scenarios such as restricted access (fewer medicines available) and increased state spending, putting pressure on the public budget. In both cases, the result is deterioration in service capacity.

The Remediar program and Pami (Comprehensive Medical Care Program) help guarantee the right to access and cover essential medicines through direct distribution to Health Centers and retirees. Supplies reach more than 7,800 health centers across the country monthly in essential medicine kits, covering 80% of primary care visits. This guarantees access to medicines for 19 million people who depend exclusively on the public health system. Both programs have faced increasing budget constraints.

External dependence and loss of autonomy

Another structural effect is the weakening of the national pharmaceutical industry. With less space for generics, local laboratories lose competitiveness.

At the same time, the presence of multinationals — mainly from the United States — is growing, which are starting to operate with greater market protection.

For pharmaceutical companies in the United States, the measure represents a strategic victory with clear gains in more profits and greater presence in the Argentine market, with less competition from local generics:

• More market protection: patents for innovative medicines will have reinforced validity in Argentina, reducing risks of “intellectual piracy”;
• Ease of entry: cutting-edge therapies can be registered and marketed more quickly;
• Technological control: maintaining control over innovation and intellectual property.

The acceptance of standards from bodies such as the FDA (the US regulatory agency) as a reference for drug recognition deepens this movement, moving the center of regulatory decision-making outside the country. This measure is not just economic — it is geopolitical. Argentina reduces its regulatory autonomy in health.

The social cost of a political choice

The government argues that the measure can attract investment and accelerate the arrival of new medicines. This effect, although possible, tends to be limited in the short term.

The price increase is immediate and concrete.

By aligning its patent policy with the interests of large international pharmaceutical companies, the Argentine government is making a strategic bet — but at a high social cost.

The Milei government’s commitment is clear: to prioritize integration into global flows of innovation and trade, to the detriment of a more protectionist model. But, for the Argentine worker, the question that remains is: what is the point of “reintegrating into the world” if, at the end of the month, the salary is not enough to buy the medicine the family needs?

As Sturzenegger stated, the measure is based on the premise that “respecting intellectual property is a direct consequence of respect for freedom and property”. Freedom, here, is always understood as the right of a minority to become richer without any government regulation.

At the center of this equation are the worker, who will see the weight of medicines in their income grow, and the health system, which will have to operate under greater financial pressure.

In the end, the promised “modernization” could translate, for millions, into something simpler and harder: paying more to take care of their own health — or not being able to take care of it.