Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Opioid defendants step up giving as a costly reckoning looms

Bloomberg//Jared S. Hopkins//August 7, 2018

Opioid defendants step up giving as a costly reckoning looms

By Bloomberg

//Jared S. Hopkins

//August 7, 2018

FILE - This Aug. 15, 2017, file photo shows an arrangement of pills of the opioid oxycodone-acetaminophen, also known as Percocet, in New York. Health data firm IQVIA's Institute for Human Data Science released a report Thursday, April 19, 2018, showing an 8.9 percent average drop nationwide in the number of prescriptions for opioids filled in 2017 by retail and mail-order pharmacies, which fill the bulk of prescriptions. (AP Photo/Patrick Sison, File)
The makers of opioid pills are giving millions of dollars in grants and donations to organizations across the country that have been hit hardest by the deadly opioid epidemic – some of which are suing the drug companies. For jurisdictions with battered law-enforcement agencies or stretched social-service programs, the benefits of having the money could outweigh any disadvantages.
AP File Photo(AP Photo/Patrick Sison, File)

The drug industry is dishing out millions in grants and donations to organizations in cities, counties and states that have sued the companies over the deadly U.S. opioid epidemic.

The efforts could help makers and distributors of prescription painkillers, who face hundreds of lawsuits by communities across the country, reduce their tax bills and build goodwill ahead of a potential multibillion-dollar settlement over their role in a crisis that kills more than 100 Americans a day.

The money is pouring into places that have been hollowed out by the epidemic. Wholesaler Cardinal Health Inc., for example, this year gave $35,500 to a nonprofit in hard-hit Clermont County, Ohio, where overdoses have soared for more than a decade. In all, the company has given at least $3 million to some 70 groups – some with ties to plaintiffs in the litigation.

Additionally, drug wholesaler McKesson Corp. seeded a standalone nonprofit dedicated to fighting the opioid-abuse crisis with $100 million, and distributor AmerisourceBergen Corp. started its own opioid-focused grant program. Amerisource said it is still processing most applications, and couldn’t provide details, but has announced a $50,000 grant to three Boise-area hospitals to launch a program to help patients who overdosed on opioids.

The contributions mostly began after the wave of lawsuits. They are small in comparison with the amount companies could be forced to pay in a settlement – an estimate by Bloomberg Intelligence analysts pegs that potential tab at as high as $50 billion.

“That’s the way these battles are fought these days. They’re not just fought in court,” said Richard Ausness, a University of Kentucky law professor. “If you read these complaints it just sounds awful what they did, so they’re trying to create a different narrative.”

Andrew Kolodny, a Brandeis University researcher and critic of opioid makers’ business practices, urged communities to turn down the funds. “I can certainly understand how desperate they are, but they’re taking blood money,” he said. “An element of this is public relations and they want to make it look like they are doing something about this problem.”

For cities and counties with battered law-enforcement agencies or stretched social-service programs, the benefits of having the money could outweigh any disadvantages.

“What it came down to was here’s $35,000 that we can bring more prevention programs to the kids in schools,” said Karen Scherra, executive director of the Clermont County Mental Health & Recovery Board. “Do we punish them, in effect, and not provide that service, simply because of what else is going on?”

Influencing opinion

Companies facing lawsuits regularly seek ways to influence public opinion. Researchers at Harvard Business School who studied 20 years of lawsuits against public companies found that targeted local advertising increased by 23 percent after lawsuits were filed, and that they increase the probability of a favorable outcome.

Oxycontin maker Purdue Pharma LP has positioned itself as an advocate for fighting the crisis, helping fund distribution of overdose antidote naloxone through a national sheriffs’ association. In recent weeks, the closely held company has also purchased advertising in national news outlets, including the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal, touting its efforts to stem the crisis

Another drugmaker named in the suits, Endo International Plc, said it is helping communities but doesn’t disclose donations by organization. Johnson & Johnson said its opioid outreach includes focusing on supporting mothers and babies, but declined to provide specific details. Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. didn’t say whether its outreach on public health has included donations related to opioids.

Corporations can deduct or donate up to 10 percent of their annual taxable income. But a company can violate self-dealing rules if giving is seen by the Internal Revenue Service as using its charity to benefit the company, including paying debts or fines, said Marcus Owens, a partner at Loeb & Loeb LLP and former director of the agency’s exempt-organizations division.

He said companies may be in a gray area for two reasons: First, a fine or debt in the opioid litigation doesn’t yet exist but is possible, but also the donations have come after they were sued and amid settlement discussions.

“That sort of coincidence might suggest self-dealing, but in order to make that a case the IRS would have to know more about how the donations were structured,” Owens said.

Alexandra Lahav, a University of Connecticut School of Law professor, said the contributions could be a tactic in settlement talks or discussions with regulators, and while the donations wouldn’t be applied dollar-for-dollar in a settlement agreement, they show goodwill on the part of the company.

“The narrative is they’ve been irresponsible and this is a way to mitigate the narrative,” she said. “What they’re probably factoring in is, if I seem less like a bad guy, then the jury is more likely to award a lower a mount, the judge is more likely to rule in my favor and the regulators are more likely to go softer on me.”

Drug distributors have denied claims that they failed to halt suspiciously large shipments of painkillers and helped mislead patients about the painkillers’ addictive properties.


Networking Calendar

Submit an entry for the business calendar