[ad_1]
New research supports the argument that "sin taxes" lead to a reduction in consumption, justifying the use of rights in the fight against obesity and other health problems, say its authors.
The Philadelphia municipal government's 2017 decision to impose a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages and artificially sweetened beverages resulted in a 38% drop in sales, according to a study released Tuesday.
Philadelphia is one of seven US cities to have adopted this measure in recent years, alongside France, Mexico and other countries.
As of January 1, 2017, the city of 1.6 million residents of the East Coast has begun to add a 1.5 cents per ounce tax on all sweetened beverages, including "dietetic" sodas.
The researchers used Baltimore, where the tax was not imposed, as a witness because of its similar socio-demographic and health profile.
The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), revealed that Philadelphia stores passed on additional costs to consumers, in whole or in part, resulting in a 51% reduction in sales in the city. .
Neighboring areas of the city that were not affected by the tax saw their sales increase, but after taking into account this effect, the net decrease in sales was estimated at 38% over one year.
"No head"
For Christina Roberto, coauthor, the numbers confirm a basic economic theory: if the price of a product increases, fewer people will buy it.
"Taxing sweetened beverages is one of the most effective strategies for reducing purchases," said assistant professor of health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, adding that it was "a evidence for public health ".
The overall goal is to achieve better health outcomes: reduction of obesity, caries and diabetes – markers that researchers have not measured in this study.
But they believe that reducing the intake of added sugars is a step in the right direction.
In the United States, children consume 17% of their calories from added sugars instead of the recommended 10%, half of these sugars from beverages.
Children from low-income families, as well as black children and adolescents, were more likely to consume fruity or sweet drinks than those from high-income or white families.
"Current evidence is already sufficient to advance tax adoption while continuing to monitor results," a group of public health experts wrote in an editorial published by JAMA.
Reacting to the newspaper, the American Beverage Association criticized the tax, saying it "harmed working families, small local businesses and their employees."
Price-sensitive consumers
Spokesman William Dermody added that American beverage companies were creating more drinks with less or no sugar with smaller bottles.
The decline in sales has been particularly strong in large supermarkets and for so-called "family" bottles and packaging, although this can be explained by more visible information panels informing consumers of the changes made.
The study also revealed no substitution effect or increased sales of untaxed drinks.
Philadelphia's relatively low-income population could account for the sharp drop in sales as these consumers are more likely to be price-sensitive. The study found that sales in Baltimore remained stable over the same period.
The Philadelphia tax has proven to be more dissuasive than at Berkeley, which was the first to adopt the measure and charge a penny more per ounce. Taxes are highest in Boulder, Colorado (two cents an ounce) and Seattle, Washington (1.75c).
The Cook County in Illinois, which includes the city of Chicago, has introduced a tax on sodas in August 2017, making it briefly the largest city in the United States with the tax. But it was repealed two months later after intense lobbying of the soft drink industry.
[ad_2]
Source link