AMERICANMADE
My most popular options training - free
Let's face it - options trading can be confusing.
That's why I put together this free report that explains it using cartoon stick figures:
I've been teaching options to regular people since 2001, and this is easily my most popular training of all time.
Here are a few comments from my readers:
- "BEST EXPLANATION on Options hands down!!"
- "Best explanations i've seen on the net so far! great job!"
- "This was so so helpful. The cartoons helped and then all of the sudden, the formal definition just clicked! Thank you!!"
- "Bill Poulos is the first to explain call and put options in a language I understand."
- "I’m not even done... and the explanation is so good I had to comment. Dude you are a great teacher."
This report sells for $29.97 on my website, but today, you can download a copy for free.
The only catch is that the download link will expire, and when it does, you'll have to pay full price on my website.
So, don't let that happen and save a copy of the report right now.
In May, our very first Policy to Profit issue covered the Section 232 investigation into pharmaceuticals. Back then it was a threat. As of Friday, it’s real. The first group of named drugmakers now faces a 100% tariff on patented drugs imported into the United States. Everyone else has until September 29.
This is the most aggressive use of trade policy to force reshoring we’ve seen. A 100% tariff doesn’t nudge behavior — it doubles the landed cost of an imported drug. For a category where America imports the majority of its medicine and active ingredients, that’s a seismic change. Here’s how it works and who it hits.
The tariff comes from an April 2 proclamation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. That’s the same national-security statute behind the steel and aluminum tariffs. It covers patented pharmaceutical products and their key ingredients across more than 130 product codes. The government’s stated concern: heavy reliance on foreign drug supply chains could cut off critical medicines in a crisis.
But this isn’t a flat 100% for everyone. The regime is staged to reward companies that move production home. The default rate is 100%. Build a U.S. plant with a government-approved onshoring plan, and it drops to 20%. Agree to most-favored-nation pricing on top of that, and it can fall to 0% through 2029.
Two important exemptions. Generic drugs and biosimilars — which make up the vast majority of U.S. prescriptions by volume — are exempt for now, though slated for review. And drugs already made in the United States pay nothing. The tariff targets branded, patented, foreign-made medicine.
The threat is already moving factories. Drugmakers have announced more than $480 billion in U.S. manufacturing commitments across 22 sites and roughly 44,000 jobs. Eli Lilly pledged $27 billion. Merck committed $70 billion. Johnson & Johnson $55 billion. New plants are planned in New York, New Jersey, Indiana, and North Carolina — the same small towns we covered in our pharma antibiotics issue.
The FDA is helping too. Its new PreCheck program offers faster regulatory engagement for companies building domestic plants. But there’s a catch that every honest analysis flags: a pharmaceutical plant takes four to five years to build and validate. The tariff is immediate. The factories are not. That gap is where the pain lives.
The winners are the companies already building here. Eli Lilly — which we covered in May — has the largest domestic footprint among the big names and a $27 billion expansion underway. Companies that front-loaded U.S. investment turn a tariff threat into a competitive moat. Their foreign-dependent rivals eat the 100% or scramble to catch up.
The second winners are the builders. Someone has to construct 22 pharmaceutical plants. That means engineering firms, construction contractors, cleanroom specialists, and equipment makers. Yet analysts note upstream equipment suppliers haven’t seen order flow matching the headline pledges — a sign that some announcements are aspirational, not shovel-ready.
Here’s the tension at the center of this policy. Reshoring drug production is a genuine national-security goal — we saw the risk when China supplies 60% of U.S. antibiotic ingredients. But a 100% tariff that lands years before the new factories open could raise drug prices in the meantime. The policy is a bet that the threat moves factories faster than the cost hits patients. Whether that bet pays off is the story of the next three years.