Johnson & Johnson posted its first $25 billion quarter with sales up 6.6%, but a jump in the effective tax rate to 18.0% from 14.7% left net income flat — while TREMFYA's $860M gain covered 94% of STELARA's patent-cliff decline and MedTech growth slowed to 3.6%.
Revenue
$25.3B
+6.6% YoY
Net income
$5.5B
-0.1% YoY
Diluted EPS
$2.27
-0.9% YoY
Operating margin
28.2%
First $25 billion quarter, but a higher tax rate wipes out the profit growth
Johnson & Johnson's fiscal second quarter of 2026 (the three months ended June 28, 2026) is a quarter where the headline profit figures and the underlying business point in opposite directions. Sales rose 6.6% to $25,310 million — the company's first quarter above $25 billion. Pre-tax profit rose 3.9%, to $6,747 million from $6,491 million. Yet net earnings landed at $5,534 million against $5,537 million a year ago: flat, down 0.1%. Diluted earnings per share — profit divided by the share count, counting shares that could still be issued from stock options and employee awards — slipped 0.9%, to $2.27 from $2.29.
Essentially the entire gap sits in one line. The tax provision rose $259 million while pre-tax profit rose $256 million.
*J&J does not report an "operating margin" line; the figure above is computed from the filing's own statement of earnings as gross profit less selling, marketing and administrative expense, research and development expense and restructuring, divided by sales. The effective tax rate is likewise computed as the tax provision divided by pre-tax earnings.
Two terms recur below. Operational growth is J&J's term for growth with the effect of currency translation stripped out — when the dollar weakens, sales booked in euros or yen convert into more dollars without a single extra unit being sold, and "operational" removes that. Adjusted figures exclude the accounting amortization of acquired drug and device patents plus items management classes as one-off, so they run well above the GAAP numbers: adjusted EPS of $2.90 versus reported EPS of $2.27.
The tax line, and why it is not a warning sign
The effective tax rate — the share of pre-tax profit paid in tax — was 18.0% this quarter against 14.7% a year ago. Applying last year's rate to this year's pre-tax profit would have produced roughly $5.76 billion of net earnings and EPS near $2.36 — about 3% growth rather than a decline.
The 10-Q's tax note discusses only the six-month rate (15.5% in 2026 against 17.8% in 2025) and does not isolate a second-quarter driver, so the specific cause of the quarterly swing is not disclosed. What the note does say is that the prior-year period benefited from the release of uncertain tax positions in international jurisdictions as statutes of limitations expired — a genuinely non-recurring benefit — and that 2026 has had a larger offsetting benefit from employee share-based compensation vesting and exercises, worth 2.9 percentage points of the six-month rate versus 0.3 points last year. That share-based benefit is lumpy and concentrated in the first quarter: the implied first-quarter 2026 rate was about 12.6%, against 18.0% in the second.
The practical read is that neither quarter's rate is a good guide to the run rate, and that the flat bottom line reflects tax timing rather than any deterioration in the business.
A second, smaller drag: diluted EPS fell 0.9% while net earnings fell 0.1%, because the diluted share count rose 0.9% to 2,440.1 million. Basic shares were flat (2,407.4 million versus 2,406.3 million), so this is not share issuance — it is outstanding employee options and awards counting as more dilutive, which is what happens mechanically when the share price rises.
The STELARA cliff is now covered by TREMFYA alone
The most consequential number in the filing is the handoff inside the Immunology franchise.
STELARA, J&J's long-dominant psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease drug, lost patent protection and is being displaced by cheaper near-copies (biosimilars). Its quarterly sales fell 55.2% to $740 million from $1,653 million — a $913 million hole. The earnings release puts the drag on Innovative Medicine's growth at roughly 760 basis points, or 7.6 percentage points.
TREMFYA, the successor immunology drug, grew 72.5% to $2,046 million from $1,186 million — an $860 million increase. The 10-Q attributes that to share gains across all approved uses with "significant IBD launch momentum." Within a single quarter, one product's rise has covered 94% of the other's decline in absolute dollars, and TREMFYA is now more than twice the size STELARA has shrunk to.
Immunology as a whole still fell 4.6% operationally to $3,844 million, because REMICADE (−25.8%) and SIMPONI (−10.5%) are also eroding. But the franchise is no longer the source of the drag it was, and Innovative Medicine grew 6.8% operationally despite carrying it.
The rest of Innovative Medicine did the lifting:
Oncology $7,406 million, +16.1% operational. DARZALEX, the multiple myeloma franchise, reached $4,207 million (+18.9%). The newer myeloma and lung assets compounded fast off small bases: CARVYKTI $657 million (+49.4%), TECVAYLI $260 million (+56.5%), TALVEY $174 million (+63.3%), RYBREVANT/LAZCLUZE $289 million (+60.8%). Offsetting this, IMBRUVICA continued its decline to $599 million (−18.6%).
Neuroscience $2,337 million, +13.4% operational. SPRAVATO grew 40.8% to $584 million and CAPLYTA 70.9% to $361 million.
One caution on CAPLYTA: it arrived with the Intra-Cellular Therapies acquisition, which closed in early April 2025, so the prior-year second quarter was its first period in J&J's accounts and the six-month comparison is against almost nothing. That said, the distortion is smaller than it looks at the segment level. J&J reports Innovative Medicine operational growth of 6.8% and adjusted operational growth — which additionally strips out acquisitions and divestitures — of 6.9%, with divestitures a 10 basis point drag. Deals were close to neutral this quarter; the growth is essentially organic.
MedTech is the soft spot
MedTech grew 3.6% operationally to $8,926 million, roughly half Innovative Medicine's rate, and its profitability went backwards: segment pre-tax margin fell to 13.2% from 14.1%. The 10-Q attributes that to $0.3 billion of costs for the planned Orthopaedics separation, higher R&D, higher commercial spending, and tariffs in cost of products sold.
The franchise detail shows the problem is not uniform:
MedTech franchise
Q2 2026 sales
Operational growth
Cardiovascular
$2,404M
+3.1%
— Electrophysiology
$1,533M
+3.1%
— Abiomed
$440M
−2.0%
— Shockwave
$335M
+14.7%
Surgery
$2,653M
+2.3%
Vision
$1,451M
+5.6%
Orthopaedics
$2,418M
+4.2%
Electrophysiology — heart-rhythm catheters, historically one of J&J's fastest-growing device lines — slowed to 3.1% operational growth, which the filing explains as new product gains (VARIPULSE, TRUPULSE, NUVISION, CRYSTAL) running against "competitive pressures in Pulsed Field Ablation catheters and China inventory dynamics." Abiomed's heart pumps actually shrank 2.0% on lower U.S. procedure volumes. Surgery's 2.3% was held back by China's volume-based procurement — a government programme that forces down device prices in exchange for volume — and by J&J's own surgery restructuring. Shockwave, the calcified-artery device business acquired in 2024, remains the standout at +14.7%.
Cost lines: a gross margin gain that is partly timing
Gross margin — the share of sales left after manufacturing cost — improved to 68.2% from 67.9%, which is notable given it absorbed both an unfavourable product mix from the STELARA decline (a high-margin drug shrinking) and tariffs in MedTech. Operational efficiency and favourable currency in cost of goods more than covered both.
Below that, the two big spending lines moved in opposite directions, and only one of them is a real structural change:
Selling, marketing and administrative expense rose to 25.4% of sales from 24.8%, on commercial investment in both segments. That is a deliberate spend behind launches.
R&D fell to 14.4% of sales from 14.8% — but the filing calls this "expense phasing" in Innovative Medicine, not a cut. In dollars, Innovative Medicine R&D was essentially flat at $2,875 million against $2,869 million while that segment's sales grew 7.8%; MedTech R&D rose 20% to $778 million. Do not read the improved R&D ratio as durable leverage; it is a timing artifact that should partly reverse.
J&J also opened a new supply-chain restructuring programme in Innovative Medicine this quarter, exiting certain manufacturing sites, with estimated total costs of $650–750 million through 2029 and $200 million booked in the quarter, mostly asset write-downs.
Talc: back to a cash cost, and the reason the six-month comparison looks alarming
Anyone looking at J&J's six-month figures will see net earnings down 35%, from $16,536 million to $10,769 million. That is almost entirely an artifact of the prior year and says nothing about 2026.
In the first quarter of 2025, after the third of J&J's attempted Chapter 11 routes for its talc liabilities was dismissed, the company reversed approximately $7.0 billion of reserves it had set aside for a bankruptcy resolution, booking it as income. That single reversal is why the six-month 2025 base is inflated; the filing states it plainly.
The 2026 position is the mirror image. Talc is once again a recurring charge: roughly $0.4 billion in the second quarter and $0.8 billion in the first half. As of June 28, 2026 there were approximately 76,000 plaintiffs in the United States with direct claims, litigation having resumed in the ordinary tort system. The remaining reserve stands at a present value of about $3.7 billion, of which roughly 40% is a current liability — meaning J&J expects to pay out roughly $1.5 billion of it within a year.
For the quarter specifically, talc is material to reported profit — $0.4 billion is about 6% of pre-tax earnings — but it is not what caused the flat net income, and at $3.7 billion against $20.8 billion of cash and marketable securities it is not a solvency question. It is a persistent earnings drag of uncertain duration, and the reserve is an estimate of settlements already agreed plus defence costs, not a cap on what unresolved claims could ultimately cost.
Separately, the planned separation of the Orthopaedics business, announced in October 2025, cost $0.3 billion in the quarter. J&J says it is still "exploring multiple paths" and targeting completion within 18 to 24 months of that announcement — so by roughly late 2027. The lack of a chosen structure this deep into the timeline is worth noting.
Takeaway: The flat net income is a tax-rate artifact, not a business problem — pre-tax profit grew 3.9%, and the more important fact is that the STELARA patent cliff is now almost entirely absorbed, with TREMFYA's $860 million quarterly increase covering 94% of STELARA's $913 million decline. The genuine weak point is MedTech, where 3.6% operational growth and a 90 basis point margin decline sit beneath a pharma business compounding at nearly double that rate.
Guidance: raised, and raised on operations rather than currency
J&J lifted full-year 2026 guidance across the board:
Full-year 2026 guidance
July 2026
April 2026
Estimated reported sales
$100.8–101.4B (mid $101.1B, +7.3%)
$100.3–101.3B (mid $100.8B, +7.0%)
Adjusted operational sales growth
6.2–6.8% (mid 6.5%)
5.6–6.6% (mid 6.1%)
Adjusted EPS
$11.60–11.75 (mid $11.68, +8.2%)
$11.45–11.65 (mid $11.55, +7.1%)
Adjusted operational EPS
$11.50–11.65 (mid $11.58, +7.3%)
$11.30–11.50 (mid $11.40, +5.7%)
The composition matters more than the headline. Adjusted operational EPS — the currency-free measure — went up $0.18 at the midpoint, while adjusted EPS, which includes currency, went up only $0.13. The $0.05 difference is a currency assumption that got less favourable: J&J now models the euro at $1.15 against $1.17 in April. Put differently, the full-year currency tailwind embedded in guidance shrank from $0.15 of EPS to $0.10, and the company still raised the reported number. The upgrade is operational, not a translation windfall — the harder and more credible of the two.
Cash generation supports it. First-half free cash flow was approximately $8.7 billion (management's estimate as of July 15, and a non-GAAP measure) against $6,214 million a year ago. Net debt fell to $28.2 billion from $31.9 billion a year earlier, with $20.8 billion of cash and marketable securities against $49.0 billion of debt.
Our read
The trajectory through the rest of 2026 looks solid on the drug side and unresolved on the device side.
On Innovative Medicine, the thesis that mattered most for J&J — whether the company could grow through the STELARA loss of exclusivity rather than merely survive it — is now largely answered in the affirmative, one quarter earlier than the arithmetic strictly required. STELARA is down to $740 million a quarter, so the remaining decline it can inflict is bounded and shrinking, while TREMFYA, DARZALEX and the myeloma bispecifics are still compounding at double-digit or better rates. The drag mathematically eases from here.
MedTech is the part to watch. Three of its four franchises grew operationally in the low single digits, the margin is absorbing separation costs and tariffs simultaneously, and Electrophysiology — the business that was supposed to be the growth engine — is now facing real competition in pulsed field ablation. The Orthopaedics separation should eventually remove the slowest-growing, lowest-margin piece, but J&J has not yet said how it will be done, and until it is, MedTech carries the cost without the benefit.
Two things to test against the third quarter: whether the effective tax rate settles nearer the mid-teens or the high-teens, since that alone swings reported EPS by roughly 4%, and whether Electrophysiology's growth re-accelerates once the China inventory effect laps. Neither changes the full-year picture much, but both determine whether the reported numbers keep understating the operational ones.