A little-known, 20-year-old law requires nursing home operators to send their unopened, unexpired prescription drugs back to pharmacies for a credit.
House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz, D-Berlin (file photo) Keith M. Phaneuf / CTMirror.org

Plans to include a new tax on opioids in the Connecticut state budget drew renewed opposition Saturday from the pharmaceutical industry, a potential complication for the budget debate scheduled Monday for the General Assembly.

A national coalition of pharmaceutical distributors warned the tax ultimately would be paid by patients, many of whom need prescription-opioid drugs to manage severe pain.

“By adopting the opioid tax, the state of Connecticut would be increasing health care costs for thousands of patients who need these medications for a number of conditions and surgical procedures, including the treatment of cancer and end-of-life hospice care,” wrote John Gray, president and CEO of the Healthcare Distribution Alliance. 

Gray released his comments about seven hours after House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, predicted that the tax would be included in the new state budget expected to be voted on Monday.

“I think it will be contained within the budget,” he said.

The speaker did not identify any specific rate, but sources close to budget negotiations between lawmakers and Gov. Ned Lamont’s administration said it would be a 1-cent-per-milligram tax on opioid manufacturers. 

The tax would be imposed not at the retail level, but at the first point of sale in the state. In Connecticut, this most commonly involves distributors selling to health care providers. That’s because most of the opioids used in Connecticut are manufactured out of state. It would raise about $20 million per year.

“The producers of opioids have made a lot of money in a very inappropriate way,” Aresimowicz said. “So it’s our intention to make sure they will be paying it, not the consumers.”

The misuse of opioids, including prescription pain relievers, heroin and synthetic opioids, has been recognized as a national health care crisis, and has prompted bills in recent years in Connecticut and many other states to increase awareness and improve health provider training.

An opioid tax was recommended by Comptroller Kevin P. Lembo and a handful of Connecticut legislators last month to complement a state-sponsored health insurance option for individuals and small businesses that don’t have employer-subsidized coverage.

That public option proposal has bogged down. But sources said the opioid tax in the new state budget would not be contingent on Connecticut offering a public option in the future.

Avatar photo

Keith M. PhaneufState Budget Reporter

Keith has spent most of his 31 years as a reporter specializing in state government finances, analyzing such topics as income tax equity, waste in government and the complex funding systems behind Connecticut’s transportation and social services networks. He has been the state finances reporter at CT Mirror since it launched in 2010. Prior to joining CT Mirror Keith was State Capitol bureau chief for The Journal Inquirer of Manchester, a reporter for the Day of New London, and a former contributing writer to The New York Times. Keith is a graduate of and a former journalism instructor at the University of Connecticut.

Join the Conversation

4 Comments

  1. Taxes on Opioids are likely to be as successful in changing behaviors as they have on tobacco. Since many take Opioids for prescribed medicine taxing Opioids reminds us of CT’s major taxes on hospitals to raise revenues. When it comes to taxes everything is fair game in CT. What’s next – taxes on all prescription drugs ? Groceries ? Funerals ? Tuition ? Heating oil ?

    1. Personally, I couldn’t even dream up all the taxes we pay as compared to 20 years ago. If someone told me, I’d laugh in their face. I’m not laughing now. Free community college, but only for the poor. My “poor” niece was offered that years ago, but declined because it was “too hard.” She’s homeless and on her second child now (my mother takes care of one), yet refuses to change her circumstances. Won’t even see a free psychologist.

  2. Really? The people who use the system legally, within the Law. With a prescription.
    Under doctor supervision? Penalize those people?
    How does this alter the Fentenyl black market or the drug misuse, causing all the difficulties?
    It seems aimed at the person who truly needs treatment and does so Legitimately.
    Are those the ones that are the problem?

Leave a comment