As global trade tensions escalate, Switzerland’s export-driven pharmaceutical industry finds itself at a challenging moment. In May 2025, the United States imposed tariffs of up to 39 percent on Swiss goods, putting pressure on Switzerland’s most important industrial sector, which is responsible for ten percent of GDP and 41 percent of exports.
In November, these tariffs were reduced to 15 percent, broadly in line with those across the European Union, with the Swiss government announcing planned direct investments by Swiss companies across sectors in the US worth USD 200 billion by the end of 2028.
With a President in the White House intent on redressing what he sees as unfair trade imbalances (although US government analysis only takes goods, rather than goods and services together, into account), Switzerland is facing a perfect storm of several different measures.
Even with tariffs at the lower 15 percent rate, Swiss companies’ ability to export to the US is restricted, while the ‘Most Favored Nation’ executive order, also introduced in May, means that companies are forced to set US drug prices to the lowest price that “comparable developed nations” pay.
Given that the US accounts for around 40 percent of Swiss pharma exports (and pharmaceuticals represent more than 50 percent of Switzerland’s total exports), without swift action, these measures could spell permanent damage for Switzerland and its most important industry.
René Buholzer of Interpharma, the association representing Switzerland’s research-based pharmaceutical companies, describes the past few months as ones of “frustration and shock. Switzerland and the United States have traditionally enjoyed a close, mutually beneficial relationship,” he says
“We are a major investor and high-quality job creator in the US, ranking among the top countries globally relative to our size.”
Adding to the confusion is President Trump’s preference for striking direct, company-specific “deals,” including recent agreements with Pfizer and Novartis.
“This approach sidelines governments and creates uncertainty for global supply chains,” says Buholzer, who has also seen key Interpharma member companies like Roche and Novartis announce big US manufacturing investments in response to tariff threats.
He hopes that this period serves as a “wake-up call” for Swiss policymakers. “If we want to keep pharma as a key driver of Swiss prosperity, we must strengthen our competitiveness as a location now. The global race for investment is fierce, and Switzerland cannot afford to be complacent.”
Most importantly, this means ensuring a fair price for innovation at home. “Guaranteeing security of supply must go hand in hand with sustainable pricing,” says Buholzer. “Politically, there is a fear that improving access might lead to higher drug prices and thus higher insurance premiums. That may be true initially, but the cost of shortages or delayed access to innovative medicines is far higher – economically and socially.”
On the international side, Buholzer is also urging Switzerland to continue diversifying its trade relationships. “We already have agreements with China and recently concluded one with India,” he notes. “Expanding this network helps offset potential losses from the US market and reinforces Switzerland’s position as a global, innovation-driven hub.”
Whether this “wake-up call” will truly accelerate reforms is still unclear. Buholzer concludes that, “a sense of urgency is often lacking in Switzerland. As one Swiss Federal Councillor quipped in the 1950s, ‘The Swiss get up early, but they wake up late’ – a warning that still rings true today.”
