Bye-bye Pfizer: The issues brought up by this bid remain unresolved

There is little reason to think that Pfizer will not be back after the six-month cooling off period comes to an end

Editorial
Monday 26 May 2014 18:54 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Few will weep as Pfizer departs our shores. The American giant sailed into Britain far too heavy-handedly, failing to pay adequate attention to those with an interest in AstraZeneca’s future – be that the science community, the company and its shareholders, or Westminster.

That Pfizer should have been so remiss, given the repeated backlashes against it in previous job-and research-cutting takeovers, was one of the most remarkable aspects of this tax-driven merger attempt. Despite all its talk of investment and speeding drugs to market, in Pfizer’s eyes this was always a transaction motivated largely by a desire to avoid US taxes, and take advantage of Britain’s rising status as an offshore haven.

That desire is not going to go away. Indeed, the appetite of American companies to do similar tax-motivated deals for British companies will only increase in the coming months as Washington moves to close off the loophole that allows them.

Other deals – such as a mooted US bid for InterContinental Hotels - are already coming, and there is little reason to think that Pfizer will not be back after the six-month cooling off period comes to an end.

So while the immediate storm may have passed, there must now be a serious debate, and quickly, about which of our industries we want to protect from foreign takeover in the public interest, and which we are happy to let go. We should also consider a halfway house, whereby certain industries are protected by an independent body to adjudicate on overseas takeovers.

Pfizer’s bid approach may have run out of time, but there are lessons from it to be heeded, and urgently.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in