CHICAGO & NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Mylan's $465 million settlement of claims it had misclassified its EpiPen injector allays the otherwise significant risk of rebate recoup payments to Medicaid agencies related to the recent EpiPen scrutiny, according to Fitch Ratings. The firm remains subject to other government-related investigations, however.
Mylan announced last week a settlement with the federal government to "resolve questions that have been raised about the classification of EpiPen ... for purposes of the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program," according to a Mylan statement. Mylan had been accused of misclassifying EpiPen as a non-innovator multiple-source (or generic) drug, rather than as a branded drug, for the purpose of paying rebates to Medicaid. Pharmaceutical firms are required to pay a 13% rebate for generic drug sales paid for by Medicaid agencies, compared to 23% for branded products.
The announcement brings a greater degree of certainty, and more quickly, than Fitch expected. Mylan will have sufficient liquidity to make the settlement payment without derailing expected de-leveraging subsequent to its mostly debt-funded acquisition of Meda. Still developing, however, is the impact of Mylan's pending launch of its own authorized generic version of EpiPen.
Fitch maintains our view that there will not be significant changes to the underlying economics for Mylan following the launch of its own authorized generic. Mylan will remain the sole source for EpiPen - whether branded or generic - and will not be subject to any incremental direct outside competition. Therefore, pricing negotiations with private third-party payers shouldn't change much, and demand is not expected to shift in any significant manner to the few competing therapies available.
That said, Medicaid pricing for Mylan's soon-to-be-launched authorized generic EpiPen is unknown. We expect the average manufacturer price (AMP) will be lower than pricing currently employed, but probably not drastically. Mylan has disclosed that approximately 20% of EpiPen sales are paid by state Medicaid agencies.
For branded sales in the remainder of 2016 or those that remain after the authorized generic launch, we expect a modest incremental reduction in profitability due to higher rebates paid to un-/under-insured consumers and to Medicaid. Some workdown of inventory in advance of the generic launch on the part of distributors and/or pharmacies may also impact sales recognized by Mylan. Most of this impact will be realized in third-quarter 2016, as reflected in the company's 2016 guidance revision.
The launch of an additional generic competitor poses the greatest threat to EpiPen's profitability in the medium term. We note that the FDA may be under pressure to approve another generic version as soon as possible, which could aid Teva Pharmaceuticals or other generic firms in bringing new generic version to market. Teva's application for an epinephrine injector was rejected by the FDA in February 2016 citing "major deficiencies." Consequently, Fitch does not anticipate meaningful outside direct competition before second-half 2017 at the earliest.
Additional information is available on www.fitchratings.com.
The above article originally appeared as a post on the Fitch Wire credit market commentary page. The original article, which may include hyperlinks to companies and current ratings, can be accessed at www.fitchratings.com. All opinions expressed are those of Fitch Ratings.
Copyright© 2016 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch's factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch's ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed.
The information in this report is provided "as is" without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers.
For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001