Deregulation boosts pharma profits by 210% YoY
Given that Covid-19 has pushed renewed focus on health, the demand for active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) has never been stronger. PHOTO: FILE
Listen to article
Owing to deregulated prices, Pakistan's pharmaceutical sector witnessed a remarkable surge in profitability, posting a 210% year-on-year (YoY) increase to Rs13.5 billion in the calendar year 2024, according to data compiled by Arif Habib Limited (AHL).
The sector's net revenue increased by 21.1% YoY, reaching Rs196.8 billion, with leading contributions from AGP (+33.8% YoY), Glaxo (+23.2% YoY), and Abbott (+22.9% YoY), according to data gathered by AHL.
"This 210% (or 3.1 times) YoY growth was driven by higher sales volumes and price adjustments following deregulation of drug prices," AHL analyst Menka Kirpalani told The Express Tribune.
Gross profits also saw a significant increase of 64.9% YoY, reaching Rs68.6 billion, supported by better pricing strategies, currency stability, and lower active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) costs. Companies such as Glaxo (+339.2% YoY), Abbott (+67% YoY), and AGP (+44.4% YoY) played a key role in this expansion. The overall gross margin for the sector improved to 34.9%, with Hinoon (51.4%) and AGP (47.8%) leading the way. Net margins also increased to 6.9%, reflecting improved operational efficiency.
The demand-side impact was negligible. Demand for pharmaceuticals and medicines naturally increases as the population grows, said Kirpalani. However, the main issue for the pharmaceutical sector was that their prices were regulated. Essential medicines were subject to a price cap linked to 70% of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and non-essential medicines to 100% of CPI, meaning companies could only increase prices up to that limit.
In February 2024, the government deregulated prices for the non-essential segment, allowing companies to adjust prices based on their own cost structures and profitability needs. As a result, gross margins improved, and volumes also increased.
Previously, some products had stalled sales due to low marginsfor instance, Panadol was temporarily unavailable because companies were unable to maintain profitability under regulated pricing. With deregulation, both margins and sales have now increased, benefiting the industry.
Despite the positive performance, finance costs grew by 4.7% YoY to Rs4.7 billion, mainly due to higher interest rates. Additionally, other income dropped by 44.4% YoY, impacting companies like Glaxo (-50.8% YoY) and Abbott (-51.6% YoY).
Among individual companies, Glaxo reported a profit of Rs6.5 billion (+12.2 times YoY) with an EPS of Rs20.52, while Abbott recorded Rs5.2 billion (+20 times YoY) with an EPS of Rs53.46. Hinoon posted Rs3.2 billion in profit (+35.4% YoY) with an EPS of Rs61.41, and AGP reported Rs2.08 billion (+75.1% YoY) with an EPS of Rs7.44. However, Searl suffered a loss of Rs3.6 billion, facing operational challenges.
Several companies, including Glaxo, Abbott, and Hinoon, announced dividends of Rs10, Rs10, and Rs40 per share, respectively, rewarding shareholders for the strong financial results.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
20 hours ago
- Business Recorder
SHC rejects pharma firm's pleas seeking hike in drug prices
KARACHI: The Sindh High Court dismissed two constitutional petitions filed by a leading pharmaceutical company, which requested for the increase of the Maximum Retail Prices (MRP) of certain drugs up to 10 percent instead of 7 percent annually, approved by the DRAP. The verdict, delivered by a division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Muhammad Junaid Ghaffar and Justice Mohammad Abdur Rahman, had the core of the legal dispute originated from a pricing of three commonly used medicines including Brufen (tablet) 200mg, Brufen Suspension 120ml, and Thyronorm (Tablet) 125 mcg. Abbott sought an annual MPR increase of up to 10 percent for the fiscal year 2023-24. The company's argument hinged on the historical categorization of these medicines as 'lower priced drugs' under Rule 10 of the Drug Pricing Policy, which traditionally entitled them to a CPI-linked increase of up to 10 percent. Abbott asserted that it had submitted the required calculations to DRAP on July 1, 2024, and that the authority's failure to issue a decision within the stipulated 30 days should, under Rule 7(2)(ii) of the policy, result in their self-determined revised prices being deemed approved and officially notified. DRAP, represented by the Assistant Attorney General for the Federation of Pakistan, contested this position. The regulatory body asserted that the MRPs of these specific medicines had, over successive years of CPI-linked adjustments, gradually escalated and now surpassed the maximum thresholds prescribed for 'lower priced drugs' under Rule 10(1) of the policy. Consequently, DRAP had reclassified them as 'other drugs,' thereby capping their permissible annual increase at 7 percent instead of the 10 percent sought by Abbott. This reclassification and DRAP's subsequent decision were upheld by its Appellate Board, compelling Abbott Laboratories to seek judicial intervention through the constitutional petitions, specifically challenging DRAP's order dated March 12, 2025, and previous orders from November 7, 2024, as 'illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional, without jurisdiction, malafide, and of no legal effect.' The High Court, in its detailed judgment, rejected Abbott's argument for 'deemed notification' or 'deemed approval.' The court clarified that rules allow for the deemed issuance of revised MRPs only if the submitted calculations are 'in conformity with' and represent 'correct calculations' under the policy. Since Abbott's claim was predicated on categorizing the medicines as 'lower priced drugs' despite their MRPs having already crossed the officially notified thresholds, the court held that Abbott's calculations were not policy-compliant. Addressing Abbott's contention that the same medicines were recognized as 'lower priced drugs' in the preceding year despite exceeding the threshold, the court stated that even if such a regulatory oversight occurred previously, it could not justify repeating the error. The court underlined the legal maxim that 'two wrongs do not make a right,' rejecting the notion that a past administrative lapse could serve as a binding precedent or justification for current policy violations. The court also drew attention to a crucial procedural lapse by the Ministry of National Health Services, Regulations and Coordination. The judgment noted that under Rule 10(2) of the Drug Pricing Policy, the Ministry is legally obligated to revise the thresholds for lower-priced drugs annually in accordance with CPI changes. This statutory requirement, the court observed, had not been fulfilled, thereby indirectly contributing to pricing, however, because Abbott Laboratories had not directly challenged this specific omission in its petitions, the court refrained from issuing a definitive order on this matter due to jurisdictional limitations. Nonetheless, the court acknowledged that the issue 'warrants attention' and granted Abbott Laboratories the liberty to pursue this concern independently before the Ministry or any other competent legal forum. The court directed that any such representation filed by Abbott in this regard must be decided upon by the respondent within 60 days. The Sindh High Court found no merit in Abbott Laboratories' plea for a 10 percent price increase. It upheld the decisions of DRAP and its Appellate Board as 'legally correct,' given the undisputed fact that as of July 1, 2024, the MRPs of the disputed medicines had indeed exceeded the thresholds specified for lower-priced drugs, thereby disqualifying them from such categorization. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
20 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Policy issues in the EFF programme — III
Covid-19 pandemic, and then the catastrophic floods in 2022, both of which had significant climate change causality – towards which Pakistan has contributed very little in terms of global carbon footprint – and pushed the country to take on considerable amount of loan — on top of its already difficult situation in terms of debt distress before these two events — that has created a meaningful gross financing issue for the country over the last few years, and over a medium term horizon. Multilateral support during both these events has been seriously lacking, including the one-time SDR allocation by IMF to the tune of around USD 2.7 billion in August 2021 – where allocation rather than being based on needs in the exceptional environment of the pandemic, was made as per the usual criteria of quota – was significantly far less than what was needed. Despite repeated calls by development activists internationally, and similar demands made under Barbados's PM Mia Mottley-led 'Bridgetown Initiative', nothing of substance has been done in this regard by the IMF. Table 3b titled 'Pakistan: External Gross Financing Requirements and Sources, 2022/23–2029/30' from May 2025 released 'IMF Country Report No. 25/109' highlights this otherwise much needed provision of IMF SDR allocation to be zero over the medium-term, which is the entire period covered in the table. On the contrary, financing requirements are huge – from FY2025-26 to FY2029-30 they are projected at USD 19.3 billion, USD 19.8 billion, USD 31.4 billion, USD 23.1 billion, and USD 22.2 billion, respectively – even after including very modest levels of current account deficit — for the same fiscal years, being projected at USD 1.5 billion, USD 2.1 billion, USD 3.9 billion, USD 4.7 billion, and USD 5.7 billion, respectively. Policy issues in EFF programme — I Pakistan's exports depend heavily on imported intermediaries, which are not possible to be appropriately make in the wake of lack of meaningful support from IMF in terms of enhanced SDR allocation — on top of releases to the tune of only USD 1 billion from time to time over roughly three-year EFF programme, which began in September 2024, and which are quite insignificant when seen in the context of the huge gross financing requirements — since the quota-based SDR allocation as assistance in the pandemic in August 2021 was low to start with, and since then likely climate change caused floods-related losses have not received much multilateral support, not to mention that the country is among the top-ten most vulnerable countries with regard to climate change crisis, and faces significant gross financing requirements over the medium term. Hence, in the absence of meaningful SDR allocation, and the adoption of otherwise unjustified over-board austerity policy, it is hard to import needed level of intermediaries for exports, which is among the main sustainable sources to achieve macroeconomic stability, to come out of the debt distress, and to move towards higher economic growth. Moreover, a lack of exports would mean lack of capacity to sustainably meet debt obligations, where unlike IMF's assessment in the report that 'Public debt remains sustainable over the medium-term… near-term risks of sovereign stress remain high…' both short-term, and medium-term risks are high, especially due to significant downside risks on account of a very volatile geopolitical situation – the recent Iran-Israel conflict saw a sudden spike in oil prices from around USD 65 per barrel to around USD 75 per barrel — and fast-unfolding climate change crisis — the Finance Minister reportedly indicated a significant role of climate change in reducing in reducing agricultural yield of major crops over the current fiscal year — creating upward pressures on imports payments, along with likely hurting exports, which overall means further increase in external financing gap, and may also result in greater debt distress. Policy issues in the EFF programme – II Instead of realizing the need to provide meaningful support in terms of enhanced SDR allocation — which is a global need being highlighted over the last few years, as indicated above, as a number of developing countries are facing serious debt distress — IMF is dealing with this situation in a routine way, in terms of the usual prescription of country enhancing its productive efficiency, which is in general a rather long-term variable in the presence of non-radical economic reform strategy that the neoliberal, and over-board austerity-based current EFF programme is not allowing. In the meantime, the country is stuck in a low-growth equilibrium. Lack of needed much larger reform scope in the current EFF programme, austerity-based approach not allowing greater investment into the demos to enhance their economic empowerment, and political voice to put greater pressure on public policy for radical, and deeper reforms, and no enhanced allocation of SDRs – not even once over the medium-term, which is the entire time horizon reflected in the programme document – coupled with a highly volatile environment of polycrisis, will likely not allow the country to reach sustainable macroeconomic stability. This in turn, would not allow the country to board an upward moving economic growth trajectory in any sustainable way. In that sense, the current EFF programme is just providing financial support mainly for a few more years to pass in a low-growth environment, which will neither help in creating basis for enhancing the export base for meaningfully dealing with the debt distress, including bringing gross financing needs to a sustainable level, nor will allow build-up of economic growth, and resilience to lower the otherwise fast-increasing poverty levels – where close to half of the population is below poverty line as per recently released World Bank figures – and to be better prepared for climate change crisis, and related 'Pandemicene' phenomenon; where Pakistan is among the top-ten climate change crisis affected countries. (Concluded) Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
New trade order: aligning policy with geopolitical realities
The global landscape of goods trade is currently undergoing a significant transformation. The established flows of commerce are being reshaped by economic, political, and technological forces. Since 2000s, this change and global trade imbalances have become more prominent. Four key metrics now define this shifting landscape: trade intensity, geographic distance, import concentration, and a newly prominent factor 'geopolitical distance'. Together, these indicators reveal how deeply the global trade map is being redrawn and why developing countries like Pakistan must adapt urgently. The new coordinates of global trade Trade Intensity remained a key indicator of globalization but is no longer that effective. Although trade continues to grow in volume, its share relative to GDP has stagnated in many regions. Countries are focusing more on domestic value addition, digital services, and sustainability over absolute trade volumes. Geographic Distance seemed to matter less in an interconnected world but now is reasserting its relevance. As countries seek to shorten supply chains in response to disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, proximity is gaining importance. Nearshoring and regional production hubs are becoming more attractive than distant low-cost manufacturing. Import Concentration is now seen as a vulnerability. Reliance on a few countries for critical goods (e.g., semiconductors, energy, or pharmaceutical) can quickly turn into a strategic liability in times of crisis. Many countries are diversifying supply sources to build resilience. Geopolitical Distance is a novel and powerful concept in today's world. Countries are strategizing and recalibrating trade ties based not only on cost and efficiency but also on political trust. The US-China decoupling, Trump's tariffs, sanctions regimes, and realignment of global blocs are the evidence that trade is shaped by diplomacy not by demand. A realignment in process Global trade is in process of realigning. According to the World Bank, global trade observed at 61% of world GDP in 2008 but then declined to 52% by 2023, indicating a shift toward domestic resilience and services. Cross-border B2C e-commerce reached $2.5 trillion by 2025, growing at a CAGR of 27%, driven by e-platforms (Alibaba, Amazon). A survey by McKinsey found that 67% of global manufacturers are planning to relocate their supply chains closer to home (nearshoring). Likewise, the presence of RCEP agreement (with 30.5% share of global GDP) in Asia-Pacific countries, expansion of South-South trade, the rise of digital platforms, and the growth of services trade are all driving a new kind of globalization. E-commerce has blurred physical boundaries, and countries are increasingly forming regional blocs to mitigate global uncertainties. The global trade order is becoming more fragmented but also more diversified. During 2017 and 2023, US imports from China deteriorated (20 percent) while US imports from Vietnam and Mexico surged (30 percent), reflecting supply chain shifts. Amid this change, resilience and adaptability have become the bases of successful trade strategies. While developed economies focus on strategic autonomy, emerging economies must watch rising protectionism, changing consumer preferences, and digital transformation. Strategic directions for Pakistan in a shifting landscape For Pakistan, being a developing country, the stakes are high. As a trade-dependent economy with limited fiscal space and a narrow export base, adapting to global shifts is essential. Despite globalization and adopting liberalization policies, Pakistan's top 5 export destinations account for over 60% of total exports, showing a lack of diversification (PBS, 20231, URAAN, 20242). Moreover, Pakistan's intraregional trade within South Asia covers only 5 per cent of the region's total trade and makes it the least economically integrated country within the region (Qaisar. S, 2023)3. In new trade order, Vietnam has emerged as a top alternative to China for US imports, Bangladesh's and India's economies are expanding while Pakistan's export diversification remains limited. Hence, new strategic directions are direly needed. The moment calls for vision and significant action. Here's how Pakistan can respond: Strategic alignment with global trends Pakistan's trade policy must be forward-looking and aligned with global developments. This means understanding shifting geopolitical alliances, embracing digital trade, and integrating climate considerations. A trade strategy informed by data and international benchmarks is needed. Build resilience and shock absorbing policy Pakistan must develop a trade framework that can withstand shocks (pandemics, wars, or climate events). This requires improved coordination between government ministries, the private sector, and research institutions to ensure rapid policy response and long-term resilience. Diversify exports Pakistan must move beyond low-value exports like raw textiles. Promising sectors include IT services & other services, agri-processed goods, and high-end textile products. Equally important is branding and then exploring new markets in Africa, Central Asia, and the Middle East, rather than relying solely on traditional partners like the US and EU. Logistical inefficiencies and regulatory hurdles cost Pakistan billions in trade. Urgent investments in port infrastructure, customs automation, regulatory reforms and implementation of URAAN initiative will be essential. Strengthen institutions and regional integration A strong institutional framework is important for managing trade policy. Pakistan should also deepen ties with regional blocs such as SCO, and the GCC, which offer significant trade and investment potential. Bilateral and multilateral engagement can open new avenues for development. Gripping the digital economy & maintaining sovereignty Pakistan must encourage and enable SMEs to use e-commerce platforms for global outreach while ensuring data protection and compliance with global digital trade standards. Digital infrastructure development should be prioritized under the national trade strategy and laws should be made to maintain country's sovereignty. In a nutshell, the global trade order is evolving and Pakistan stands at a crossroads. The country must embrace innovation, integration, and reform. With the right mix of strategy and execution, Pakistan has the potential to adapt to the new geometry of trade and connect with new coordinates of global trade. AnnualAnalytical_Report_on_External_Trade_Statistics_of_Pakistan_FY2023.pdf Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
