CEO Martin Shkreli recently came under fire after raising the price of Daraprim, a drug many people rely on, 5,000%, from $13.50 a pill to 750 dollars. Despite the incredible reaction from critics across the country, Shkreli believes he was justified in doing so by claiming it was to raise money so he could create more drugs. The question now becomes: Can this 5,000% price increase be ethically justified? Using utilitarianism, I will argue that this price increase is not ethically justified. Daraprim is a drug that fights toxoplasmosis; it is a foodborne illness and a common complication of cancer and AIDS. It is also used in combination with other drugs in the treatment of acute malaria. It works by targeting and killing the Toxoplasma parasite that attacks people with weakened immune systems. Turing Pharmaceuticals, the company of which Martin Shkreli is CEO, was given exclusive rights. The core belief of Deontology is that consequences do not determine whether an action taken is morally permissible or not. This means that, as long as the action taken is morally permissible, then that is all that matters, the goal is to always act in a morally permissible way, regardless of the consequences. Morally permissible has to do with whether the action taken was right or wrong. Martin Shkreli said he raised the price of Daraprim in order to raise capital that he could use to fund research into developing new drugs. Since for him it was a morally permissible action, he believed it was the right thing to do, never mind that the outcome of this action would lead to many people not being able to afford the drugs and possibly cause deaths because it was considered the right action to be undertaken against him. Therefore, the price increase would not be taken into account