The British government in March announced that it intended to introduce a tax on sugary drinks in 2018 to tackle childhood obesity. Whether the tax, which is to be debated this summer, achieves its public-health goals depends on the details and on rigorous evaluation of its effects.
The UK is not alone in worrying about the global rise in obesity-related ailments, such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease — costly conditions that can lead to significant disability and early death. Many countries have introduced, or are considering, taxes on unhealthy foods and drinks — in particular, those to which sugar has been added.
For example, Chile has an 18 percent tax on high-sugar drinks; France taxes drinks with added sugar or artificial sweeteners; and Hungary taxes food and drinks with high sugar, salt and caffeine content. Philadelphia recently became the largest US city to introduce a tax on sweetened drinks.
Illustration: Mountain people
These food taxes operate one of the most effective behavioral-change levers available to policymakers: price. However, it would be premature to conclude that higher prices necessarily lead to lower consumption and thus better health outcomes. A tax’s effectiveness depends on how it is designed, and how consumers and the food industry respond to the incentives it creates.
The introduction of taxes on sugary drinks in Mexico and Berkeley, California, has demonstrated the industry’s willingness to fight legislation that might lower its profits. Evidence suggests that these taxes, once implemented, did indeed result in a change in price for customers, who subsequently bought fewer sugary drinks.
However, little is known about the effect of these taxes on public health. Obesity and its related ailments take a long time to develop, and isolating the effects of food taxes from changes caused by other health policies and cultural trends is challenging. However, both mathematical modeling and simple logic suggest that these taxes improve health, and detailed evaluations have been launched in Mexico and elsewhere to quantify the effect.
Interestingly, all sugary drink taxes, whether in France, Hungary, Mexico, or Chile, are sales taxes; they lead directly to point-of-sale price increases, often in proportion to the volume of the drink. In Mexico, for example, the tax is a peso per liter, which raises the price by about 10 percent.
This is where the proposed UK scheme differs. Former British chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne announced a two-tiered levy, with the explicit aim of encouraging the industry, rather than consumers, to change behavior.
Under Osborne’s plan, the sugary drinks industry would be charged about £0.18 (US$0.24) per liter for products containing 5g to 8g of sugar per 100ml of liquid, and £0.24 per liter for drinks with more than 8g of sugar per 100ml. For example, Sprite, which has 6.6g of sugar per 100ml, would be taxed at the lower rate; Coca-Cola, with 10.6g per 100ml, would pay the upper rate. The revenue is to be used to fund sports programs in schools and expand breakfast clubs.
In his budget statement, Osborne challenged the sugary drinks industry to respond to his proposal by reformulating their products, encouraging consumers to switch to low-sugar brands and reducing portion sizes.
The proposed tax has been widely welcomed by public health organizations and campaigners. However, because placing the burden on industry is a different approach than has been implemented elsewhere, the effects are not entirely predictable. For example, there is nothing to stop a company from raising prices across its product range, thereby erasing any price difference between high-sugar drinks and low-sugar alternatives.
The possibility of the reformulation of existing offerings and new entrants into the market are other important uncertainties. In 2014, Coca-Cola introduced its low-sugar alternative, Coca-Cola Life. With its distinctive green packaging and wholesome image established through advertising campaigns, the new product captured more than 2 percent of total Coca-Cola sales in the first year after its introduction.
However, it is unclear whether these additional sales came from consumers who would otherwise be drinking full-sugar Coca-Cola, the diet version of the soft drink, or other beverages, such as fruit juice or water.
In his statement, Osborne excluded small producers from the legislation, but he did not define what he meant by “small.” This could encourage an expansion and diversification of small designer products with a market advantage, as has happened with craft beer.
Finally, the government has suggested that the industry should consider providing smaller portions, but existing vending and storage infrastructure is designed for 330ml cans and 500ml bottles. Any large change would require an industrywide shift in packaging and distribution.
The debate has already begun. The UK soft drink industry is considering legal action, arguing that the tax is anti-competitive given that pure fruit juice and sweetened milk are not included: for example, Mars Milkshake has 12.8g of sugar per 100ml. On the other side, some campaigners want high-sugar foods, such as sweets and cakes, to be included in the proposed legislation.
The world will be watching the UK with interest, as its approach would be politically easier for other countries to adopt. Ireland recently became the latest country to announce its intention to levy a tax on sugary drinks.
If industry responds to the tax by reformulating products and changing its marketing strategy, and if this leads to a reduction in sugar intake in the UK, then the tax will have been a success. However, accomplishing this will require policymakers to get the legislation right and to ensure that its effects are properly assessed.
Adam Briggs is a Wellcome Trust research training fellow at the British Heart Foundation Centre on population approaches for non-communicable disease prevention. Mike Rayner is a professor of population health at the Nuffield Department of Population Health and director of the British Heart Foundation Centre. Peter Scarborough is a senior researcher at the British Heart Foundation Centre.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry