“There is a benefit, but it is not so significant” – Kommersant

Why existing state support measures are not enough to stimulate producers of substances, the company’s president told Kommersant Alexander Semenov.

— Are the existing measures of state support for manufacturers of pharmaceutical substances sufficient? The Ministry of Industry and Trade is talking about preferential loans within the framework of the cluster investment platform and special investment contracts (SPIC).

– No. The most effective measure completed in early 2020. I mean 50% subsidies for leasing equipment for the production of active pharmaceutical ingredients. As for SPICs, they were used by a very small number of companies. We signed such a contract five years ago, but we didn’t see any particular advantages for ourselves in this mechanism.

According to its terms, 90% of the revenue was to come from products included in the SPIC. But the pandemic began, and we switched to antiviral items, the demand for which in 2018, when the contract was concluded, was not as great as during COVID-19. Therefore, on a formal basis, we were not able to receive tax preferences provided for by the SPIC. This situation is not only with us, but also with other companies.

Regarding the cluster platform, we are now thinking about whether to participate. The loan turns out to be preferential, but the conditions are still not what we expected. It was said that the loans would be at 1–2%, but the real rate is 6.5% plus 1.5–2% for the cost of the bank guarantee. In general, this is, of course, cheaper than the commercial rate, but the loan is issued for a limited period with additional restrictions. That is, there is a benefit, but it is not so significant.

There is a good program for preferential lending at 1% per annum for the purchase of equipment from the Industrial Development Fund (according to the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the fund has already approved financing for 9 billion rubles for 21 projects for the production of substances.— “b”).

— Active Component and Protek announced joint investments in seven new projects, including intermediates. Why did you decide to take up this field?

— This is a new, but highly demanded direction. We want to move away from dependence on the supply of Chinese and Indian intermediate products and take several steps towards synthesis, to create the production of so-called dirty chemistry. We thought it could be cost effective.

– Will you have a full production cycle or some of the raw materials from abroad?

— Intermediates are launched in 10–15 positions, and we have about 60 positions in our assortment and another 80 positions are possible in the future. We will gradually expand this list, but for now we buy some from China and India. For now we do not use intermediates from Russian companies, but we purchase reagents and reagents. We have good examples. For example, we have been importing isopropyl alcohol from Germany and South Korea for many years, and we have been taking it from Russia for a year now.

– Are there any difficulties with obtaining intermediates abroad now?

– Of course have. First, there are certain limitations. Intermediates that fall under dual-use products or are used in the production of hazardous, flammable substances are difficult to import from China or India. Secondly, logistics are very long. Thirdly, fluctuations in the exchange rate of the ruble are reflected in the cost.

— In the fall of 2024, the “second odd one out” rule should come into effect, allowing companies producing full-cycle drugs to participate in government procurement. The authorities said that they would monitor the depth of localization. Is the industry ready for this?

— The traceability system will be operational from the first quarter of 2025. Therefore, companies have time to invest in the production of substances and receive preferences. But the “second odd one out” rule still applies to a very limited list of drugs – only 215 items.

Interviewed by Polina Gritsenko