Andrew Yang on opioids: what the evidence says · JRE #1245
SUBJECT: OPIOIDS
The short answer
Yang claims Purdue Pharma was fined $635 million for opioid marketing violations after making about $16 billion, implying the fine was a trivial fraction of profits. Yang's figure for the fine is accurate: in May 2007 Purdue Frederick Company (Purdue Pharma's parent) and three executives pleaded guilty to federal charges of misbranding OxyContin, and were ordered to pay a total of $634.5 million, commonly rounded to $635 million.
Not a true/false call. Every claim is logged with its sources; read the exhibits below.
that company man that company got fined 635 million which sounds like a lot until you realize they made like 16 billion
What the evidence says 01 / RECORD
Yang's figure for the fine is accurate: in May 2007 Purdue Frederick Company (Purdue Pharma's parent) and three executives pleaded guilty to federal charges of misbranding OxyContin, and were ordered to pay a total of $634.5 million, commonly rounded to $635 million. His revenue estimate understates the actual scale, however. Court records, congressional testimony, and bankruptcy filings put Purdue's cumulative OxyContin revenue at roughly $31 billion by 2016 and over $35 billion by the time of its 2019 bankruptcy filing, nearly double the $16 billion Yang cited, and that figure is gross revenue rather than profit. The 2007 penalty was also not Purdue's last: in 2020 the company pleaded guilty to additional federal fraud and kickback charges as part of a broader multibillion-dollar global resolution, and subsequent state and federal settlements with Purdue and the Sackler family have run into the billions of dollars beyond the original 2007 fine. Overall, the core point that a $635 million penalty was small relative to Purdue's opioid earnings is well-supported, but the specific $16 billion revenue figure is significantly lower than documented estimates.