Trump's proposal of a 25 percent tariff on imported medicines could deliver a serious blow to Britain's pharmaceutical industry and threaten longstanding transatlantic partnerships, Bain said.

LONDON, April 18 (Xinhua) -- The United States should avoid imposing tariffs on pharmaceutical imports, as such measures would disrupt global medical supply chains, drive up healthcare costs for American consumers, and undermine crucial international scientific collaboration, a senior British trade official has warned.

In an exclusive interview with Xinhua, William Bain, head of trade policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, said that proposals by U.S. President Donald Trump to introduce a 25 percent tariff on imported medicines could "deliver a serious blow to Britain's pharmaceutical industry and threaten longstanding transatlantic partnerships."

"There are currently zero tariffs on pharmaceutical drugs in the U.S.," Bain said. "So, if across-the-board tariffs were introduced at a rate of 25 percent, the economic impact on the sector in the United Kingdom (UK) and the Republic of Ireland would be considerable."

Bain emphasized that pharmaceuticals are a vital part of Britain's exports to the United States. In 2023, UK exports of pharmaceutical and medicinal products to the U.S. totaled 8.8 billion pounds (11.68 billion U.S. dollars), representing 23 percent of the UK's total chemical exports to the U.S.

He cited a 2024 study by the Centre for Inclusive Trade Policy at the University of Sussex, which found that a flat 20 percent tariff on pharmaceuticals would result in a 16 percent decline in Britain's pharmaceutical exports.

Bain also highlighted the sector's domestic significance, noting that the UK pharmaceutical industry directly employs approximately 73,000 people nationwide.

While Trump has argued that tariffs could help repatriate pharmaceutical manufacturing to the U.S., Bain cautioned that such a move could have wide-reaching negative consequences.

"Pharmaceutical tariffs would affect key medical and drug supply and sourcing chains in the U.S. and cost U.S. consumers of everyday medicines more," he warned. "It is important to retain current scientific and research links with the European market to maximize benefits to U.S. consumers. Tariffs on pharmaceutical products would be a lose-lose scenario."

Bain's concerns echo broader anxiety within the UK pharmaceutical sector, which includes global leaders like AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline. The U.S. is the largest market for both companies, with AstraZeneca alone generating over 20 billion pounds of revenues annually from its American operations.

The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI), the UK's main trade body for the sector, has long advocated for the elimination of tariffs on medicines and pharmaceutical components.

Scientific experts have also raised alarms about the implications of such tariffs. Gino Martini, chief executive of the Precision Health Technologies Accelerator in Birmingham, previously told Xinhua that pharmaceutical tariffs could collapse fragile global supply chains and limit patient access to essential medications.

"Health and disease recognize no man-made borders," he said. "We have to be mindful of unintended consequences, as the pharmaceutical supply chain is notoriously delicate and complex. Anything that hampers it could result in shortages and direct harm to patients."

Similar warnings have emerged in the United States. Joaquin Duato, chief executive of Johnson & Johnson, recently told analysts there's a clear reason why pharmaceutical tariffs are currently zero - because tariffs can disrupt supply chains and cause shortages.

Bain concluded by noting that the pharmaceutical industry has long depended on open markets, international research collaborations, and stable trade relations. Undermining those foundations, he said, would weaken health systems and harm patients - both in the U.S. and globally. (1 pound = 1.33 U.S. dollars)