Under the terms, the opioid maker agreed to pay $900m, and the family behind it agreed to pay up to $6.5bn.

Summary

Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family have agreed to a $7.4 billion settlement over their role in the opioid crisis.

The deal, $1 billion larger than a previous 2024 proposal rejected by the Supreme Court, includes $6.5 billion from the Sacklers and $900 million from Purdue.

Funds will support opioid addiction treatment and prevention efforts.

The settlement, among the largest in U.S. history, still requires court approval.

Critics note the Sacklers’ $11 billion withdrawals before Purdue’s bankruptcy, and victims emphasize the ongoing human cost of the crisis.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    401·
    3 months ago

    So they still made 3.5 billion at the end.

    Fines for this stuff should start at gross profit over the entire period and build up from there.

    Otherwise it’s just a cost of business. Shit like this should bankrupt corporations and the board members controlling it. Make every stock worthless and then corporations would stop

    • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      Fines for this stuff should start at gross profit revenue over the entire period and build up from there.

      FTFY. We should not give a fuck whether they were profitable when accounting for the harm they cause (especially since that basically just gives less competent perps a discount). If it sinks the company, so be it.

    • triptrapper@lemmy.world
      1·
      2 months ago

      At the very least they should lose every penny they have, and every penny they earn henceforth should go directly to the fund. Or am I just describing incarceration?

      • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
        1·
        2 months ago

        The law protects property owners, so my interpretation is likely weak but asset forfeiture is normal in situations where assets are gained by illegal means. Seems easy to deduce that most of their wealth is derived from criminal activity.