CEO Martin Shkreli recently came under fire after raising the price of Daraprim, a drug many people rely on, by 5,000% from $13.50 per pill to $750 . Despite the incredible backlash from critics across the country, Shkreli believes he was right to do so, saying it was to raise money to be able to create other pharmaceutical drugs. The question that now arises is: 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 which attacks people with weakened immune systems. Turing Pharmaceuticals, the company of which Martin Shkreli is CEO, has exclusive rights. The main 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 manner, regardless of the consequences. Morally permissible, it is a question of knowing whether the action taken was good or bad. Martin Shkreli claimed to have raised the price of Daraprim in order to raise capital so that it could be used to finance research into the development of new drugs. Since this was a morally permissible action in his eyes, he believed it was the right thing to do, regardless of the fact that the outcome of this action would prevent many people from purchasing their medications and could potentially causing deaths because it was considered the right action to take towards him. The price increase would therefore not be taken into account