FTC and seven states seek contempt ruling against Martin Shkreli over pharma ban

Regulators allege 'Pharma Bro' traded in at least 60 drug companies after lifetime ban

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
Federal regulators and seven US states have asked a federal court to hold Martin Shkreli, the pharmaceutical executive known as 'Pharma Bro', in contempt, alleging he repeatedly violated a lifetime ban on working in the drug industry by trading in at least 60 pharmaceutical companies and discussing them on live streams.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and seven states filed the motion on Tuesday in US district court in New York City. They allege that since Shkreli's release from prison in May 2022, he has traded stock in at least 60 pharmaceutical companies and publicly commented on their businesses, in breach of conditions prohibiting him from directly or indirectly participating in the pharmaceutical industry, including owning stakes or influencing business decisions.

According to the FTC, Shkreli publicised his activities through live streams and posts on YouTube, X and Reddit. In one stream he told viewers: 'I'm showing you how to trade and invest in biotech.' In another, he described a 'magic trick', saying: 'It doesn't matter what trades I make because I can always find a couple of biotech stocks to smoke.' The agency also alleges he used the streams to organise public campaigns to short pharmaceutical stocks based on predictions that clinical trials would fail.

The filing argues that Shkreli 'should be held in civil contempt and face sanctions to purge his current contempt and to coerce his future compliance'. Proposed sanctions include a complete accounting of his pharmaceutical stock trades, divestment of any ownership in pharmaceutical companies, a monetary fine equal to his profits, and clear and escalating consequences, including additional fines and incarceration, for any future violations.

The ban stems from a 2022 ruling that found Shkreli had run an illegal anticompetitive scheme to raise the price of Daraprim, a drug used to treat malaria, certain cancers and toxoplasmosis, by more than 5,000%, from $17.50 to $750 a tablet. The same year a court fined him $64.6m, describing his conduct as 'egregious, deliberate, repetitive, long-running and ultimately dangerous [and] illegal'.

FTC competition bureau director Daniel Guarnera said on Tuesday that defendants must fulfil their obligations when a court issues an order, and that the filing 'should serve as notice that the FTC will not hesitate to enforce violations of court orders'. New York Attorney General Letitia James also urged the court to punish Shkreli.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The motion could determine whether lifetime industry bans can be enforced through financial market activity, not just direct employment or board roles.
  • A contempt finding could force Shkreli to sell any pharmaceutical holdings and pay over profits, with incarceration possible for further breaches.
  • The case keeps public attention on one of the most controversial episodes in recent pharmaceutical pricing.

Background

Shkreli became widely known as 'Pharma Bro' after a dramatic increase in the price of Daraprim. In 2022, a US court found he conducted an illegal anticompetitive scheme, fined him $64.6m and banned him from the drug industry for life. His release from prison in May 2022 came with conditions barring any direct or indirect participation in the pharmaceutical industry. The current motion argues that stock trading and public commentary on drug companies amount to such participation.

Key Perspectives

FTC and seven states: They argue Shkreli's public trading and livestreamed commentary are 'brazen violations' of the court order. They want sanctions that include a full accounting, divestment, a fine matching his profits, and escalating penalties.

The court: The judge will need to decide whether trading in pharmaceutical stocks and discussing companies online counts as participating in the industry under the terms of the 2022 ban.

Critics and skeptics: The available reporting contains no response from Shkreli or any opposing argument. The motion is a one-sided filing at this stage, and any defence would come later in the legal process.

What to Watch

  • The court's decision on the contempt motion and any sanctions it imposes.
  • Whether Shkreli is ordered to provide a full accounting of his pharmaceutical trades and divest holdings.
  • How the FTC responds to any further live stream or trading activity, given its request for escalating fines and incarceration.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workSubscribe