Dear Readers,

We are very pleased to present our first research report this quarter on How Geopolitics Has Reshaped Global Biomedical Investments in 2025.

This is following our recent announcement on our new product GHF Plus: Global Health Policy Intelligence.

Let us know if you want to have a look and have a chat? Just hit reply to this email!

GHF Plus - our premium offering includes quarterly thematic reports with our signature analyses and insights. In addition, you can also ask us any questions you may have on the field, in a thirty-minute call with us every quarter where we are also happy to share our expertise and take you behind-the-scenes.

Find our work valuable? Consider become a paying subscriber. Tracking global health policy-making in Geneva is tough and expensive. Help us in raising important questions, and in keeping an ear to the ground. helps us meet our costs.

Gratitude to our subscribers who help us contribute to greater accountability in global health.

Best,

Priti

Feel free to write to us: genevahealthfiles@gmail.com

Find us on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/genevahealthfiles.bsky.social

GHF Plus: Global Health Policy Intelligence

How Geopolitics Has Reshaped Global Biomedical Investments in 2025

An Analysis of Sectoral Shifts in Response to U.S. Tariffs, Global Supply Chain Realignments, and Post-COVID R&D Agendas

By Vivek N D

Global biopharma funding touched US $ 100 billion in 2024 according to industry estimates.

Since the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term in January 2025, the global biomedical investment landscape has undergone a seismic shift. His administration’s renewed commitment to protectionist trade policies, particularly via the reinstatement of pharmaceutical and biotech tariffs, has catalyzed an extensive reorientation of financial and strategic priorities in the health sector. Such protectionist trade measures, combined with global economic uncertainties, post-pandemic vulnerabilities, and intensifying geopolitical frictions across the globe, have forced companies to recalibrate investment strategies across vaccines, diagnostics, therapeutics, and biologics manufacturing.

This report explores five interlocking trends in global biomedical investment: efforts to avoid U.S.-imposed tariffs, measures taken to hedge against supply chain disruptions, the resurgence of global R&D investment in mRNA technology, the European Union’s strategy to attract displaced scientific talent from the United States, and the growing role of India and Brazil, increasingly seen as stable biomedical manufacturing hubs.

1. Avoiding Tariffs Imposed by the United States

A centerpiece of the Trump administration’s 2025 economic policy has been the reintroduction of wide-ranging tariffs on foreign imports, particularly those targeting Chinese pharmaceuticals, ingredients, and biotechnology components. These tariffs, framed as a national security measure to reduce dependency on foreign countries, have driven multinational firms to invest heavily in U.S.-based operations to avoid costly levies and secure a foothold in the world’s most lucrative biomedical market.

One of the most prominent examples of this strategic shift is Roche’s commitment to invest $50 billion over the next five years in U.S. manufacturing infrastructure. The Swiss-based pharmaceutical company described this move not only as an industrial investment but also as a geopolitical hedge—ensuring its positioning as a domestic supplier capable of weathering policy-driven import restrictions. Similar motives are reflected in investments by other pharmaceutical giants.

Bristol Myers Squibb announced a $40 billion investment over five years aimed at fortifying its U.S. biologics capabilities. Takeda, the Japanese multinational, outlined a $30 billion investment agenda in the U.S., signaling a decisive pivot away from facilities in East Asia.

Johnson & Johnson, already entrenched in the U.S. market, announced plans to commit over $55 billion toward U.S.-based expansion through 2029. These firms are responding not only to tariffs, but to incentives embedded in the Trump administration’s reshoring strategy, which favors companies that bring jobs and infrastructure back onto American soil.

Sanofi, Novartis, and Eli Lilly are among others reshaping their strategy partly in response to prevailing geopolitical dynamics. Sanofi pledged to invest at least $20 billion in U.S. operations by 2030, while Novartis committed $23 billion to boost its American footprint, directly citing the tariff environment as a motivation.

Eli Lilly, meanwhile, has earmarked $27 billion for the construction of new domestic plants. These moves indicate that American political shifts are influencing global capital flows as much as commercial demand or technological innovation.

Samsung Biologics, based in South Korea, also benefited from this realignment. In 2025, it secured a $518 million production contract from a major U.S. pharmaceutical company seeking to bypass Chinese contractors. This agreement reflected Washington’s preference for allied partners like South Korea, which are viewed as politically reliable and less vulnerable to sanctions or trade retaliation.

2. Hedging Against Supply Chain Instability

Beyond tariffs, geopolitical tensions have illuminated the fragility of transcontinental supply chains, especially those tied to China or Europe. As the U.S. adopts a more aggressive posture toward strategic competitors and even longstanding allies, companies are seeking to insulate their operations through geographic diversification.

WuXi Biologics, a leading Chinese contract development and manufacturing organization (CDMO), made headlines by selling its German manufacturing plant to Japan’s Terumo for $167 million. The sale was part of a broader strategic retreat from Western markets, prompted by growing concerns over political scrutiny, export controls, and the threat of sanctions.

This pattern of recalibration is not isolated. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, one of the largest biotech players in the U.S., signed a multibillion-dollar agreement with a domestic CDMO to expand localized production. The contract, valued at over $3 billion, reflects a growing consensus that the risks of relying on transnational logistics outweigh the cost advantages they once offered.

Elsewhere, Novo Nordisk, the Danish pharmaceutical major, invested over $1 billion to modernize its manufacturing footprint in Brazil. The move, while commercially beneficial, is also strategic. Henrik Wulff, executive vice president of chemistry, production, control, and product supply at Novo Nordisk stated, “With this expansion of the Montes Claros site, we are strengthening our global production capacity, which will enable us to meet both current and future demand for innovative medicines worldwide”. By scaling up operations in Latin America, Novo reduces its reliance on volatile global supply chains and protects itself from potential trade disruptions or maritime chokepoints.

These examples reflect a fundamental recalibration: in 2025, risk management is not just about cybersecurity or clinical trial design—it’s about geopolitical positioning. The ability to produce drugs close to target markets with minimal exposure to hostile trade or regulatory regimes has become a defining metric for biomedical investments.

3. Strategic Global R&D Rebound for mRNA Technology

While geopolitical friction has complicated manufacturing decisions, it has not slowed the momentum behind biotechnology R&D, especially in the field of mRNA. The technology, which achieved global fame during the COVID-19 pandemic, is now attracting unprecedented levels of investment as firms look to expand its application to other infectious diseases and oncology.

In the first quarter of 2025 alone, more than $11 billion was poured into mRNA pipelines across major research centers. This funding supported over 235 active development candidates, with at least 430 patents filed globally. The number of clinical trials in mRNA also surged past 170, signaling a sustained post-pandemic R&D boom.

Market forecasts reinforce this enthusiasm. According to research published in March 2025, the global mRNA vaccine market is expected to grow from $10.4 billion in 2025 to $18.28 billion by 2030—an impressive compound annual growth rate of nearly 12%. This growth is being driven not only by COVID-19 variants but by entirely new use cases, including flu, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), Cytomegalovirus (CMV), and personalized cancer vaccines.

One illustrative example is BioNTech’s decision to invest $1 billion over ten years in its UK operations. The German innovator is seeking to diversify its clinical trial sites, deepen its access to UK-based scientific talent, and benefit from the British government’s aggressive support for biopharmaceutical R&D. The UK’s political stability and scientific infrastructure make it an attractive counterweight to both U.S. volatility and EU bureaucratic complexity.

(Also see August 2025: Kennedy Cancels Nearly $500 Million in mRNA Vaccine Contracts – New York Times)

4. EU Incentivizing Researchers amid U.S. Immigration Constraints

Despite the movement towards the U.S., there is also an undeniable shift in the opposite direction, also driven by American politics.

As yet less visible, but equally significant, trend in 2025 is the movement of human capital away from the United States. Under the Trump administration, stricter immigration controls, reduced federal research funding, and increased political interference in science policy have created an inhospitable environment for international researchers.

In response to the shifting global landscape of scientific research and talent mobility, the European Commission has launched an ambitious initiative aimed at attracting top-tier researchers and scientists to the European Union—particularly those affected by the restrictive policies emerging from the United States under Trump’s second administration. Dubbed “Choose Europe for Science,” the program is designed to serve as a haven for scientists seeking stable, well-funded, and politically autonomous environments for research. The initiative is not only a statement of scientific solidarity but also a strategic geopolitical move to reinforce Europe’s leadership in global innovation.

Backed by a substantial budget of €500 million (approximately $568 million) to be disbursed between 2025 and 2027, the program will fund fellowships, joint appointments, and advanced infrastructure access for international researchers across a range of disciplines—from biomedical sciences to climate and quantum computing. Importantly, the plan is complemented by a broader policy goal: the European Commission has urged all member states to raise their national R&D expenditure to 3% of GDP by 2030. This aligns with the EU’s post-COVID competitiveness agenda, recognizing that attracting world-class researchers displaced by funding cuts or political interference elsewhere—particularly in the U.S.—is essential to building a resilient, future-facing European knowledge economy.

5. Stable Supply Chains and Markets in India and Brazil

As firms flee volatile trade corridors, India and Brazil have emerged as pillars of reliability. Both countries offer scale, regulatory maturity, and relative political stability—factors that are becoming increasingly rare in the current geopolitical climate.

In Q1 2025, India’s pharmaceutical and healthcare sectors saw 71 deals valued at a combined $2.6 billion. These deals spanned API development, diagnostics, and biologics manufacturing. The surge reflects global confidence in India’s capacity to serve regulated markets like the U.S. and Europe, without the geopolitical baggage associated with Chinese supply chains.

Amgen’s decision to invest $200 million in a new Indian manufacturing facility exemplifies this trend. Citing the need to diversify away from China and leverage India’s production scalability, the investment emphasized India’s strong alignment of quality, cost-efficiency, and geopolitical neutrality.

Brazil is enjoying similar momentum. Novo Nordisk’s expansion there not only strengthens regional manufacturing autonomy but also allows the company to hedge against global supply chain risks. As a BRICS nation with favorable trade agreements, Brazil offers pharmaceutical firms market access and insulation from Western-driven economic shocks.

Tail Piece

In 2025, geopolitical events no longer reside in the background of global biomedical investment—they are front and center. The second Trump administration has catalyzed sweeping changes in trade policy, immigration rules, and supply chain architecture. In response, pharmaceutical and biotech companies are pursuing a fundamentally different investment logic—one defined by national proximity, political alignment, and market resilience.

Now, Trump is reconfiguring pharmaceutical supply chains with a sharp transatlantic edge, signaling a break from prior cooperative norms. A forthcoming tariff—potentially as high as 250%—on drugs manufactured outside the US looms as a blunt instrument to enforce domestic production priorities. Letters sent at the beginning of August 2025 to 17 major pharmaceutical companies, including Novartis, Eli Lilly, Roche, Merck, and Pfizer, among others, demand immediate price reductions for the US market. These firms have until 29 September to submit “concrete commitments,” or face swift and retaliatory measures.

Capital is now flowing into geographies that promise insulation from tariffs, minimal regulatory interference, and robust infrastructure. The United States has become a magnet for reshored manufacturing, while Europe is emerging as a refuge for intellectual capital. Meanwhile, India and Brazil are proving that strategic neutrality and production capability can together make these countries wise investments.

Ultimately, money in medicine has become not only a matter of profitability or pipeline potential—but of geopolitical navigation. And in 2025, the map of biomedical investment looks vastly different from the one the world knew just five years ago.