New fat tax on cans of the good stuff. Where will it all end?

16 May 2012

fizzy drinkIn a northern town a British man sits clutching a can. Slurping from the sparkling liquid he laments the fact that he will be unable to buy another one. Bureaucratic officials have decided to levy an arbitrary tax on his drink, because they, in their wisdom, have decided he shouldn’t drink it. No, this isn’t a Glaswegian drinking a can of Tennent’s Super, but an ordinary Joe drinking a can of pop.

The “fat tax” bandwagon is rolling around again, with members of the Department of Public Health in Oxford suggesting a 20% tax could lead to a drop in obesity-related diseases.

As reported in the British Medical Journal, Dr Oliver Mytton and Dr Mike Rayner claim poor diets in the UK must be tackled, and suggest taxation is one way of achieving this aim. They estimate that taxing sugary drinks at this rate could cut up to 2,700 heart disease deaths a year.

Dr Rayner said “obesity has rocketed recently and if anything our diet is getting worse. We need to take steps to tackle this problem as a nation. It’s affecting our health and it’s affecting our wallets through the increased burden on the NHS and the taxpayer.

“David Cameron said that he wanted to look at fat taxes last October. He should now commission an independent review of the existing evidence that looks at the options for taxing unhealthy foods. It is basic economic theory that raising the price will change consumption, and we already use the taxation system in this way to influence behaviour” he finished.

The research team claims government intervention by way of taxation can be justified when the market fails to provide the ‘optimum’ good for society’s well-being, citing the duties on alcohol and tobacco as a prime example. “We have taxes on unhealthy goods such as tobacco and alcohol. And we don’t have taxes on books as they can be seen as a public good to be encouraged.” Clearly someone ought to tell them that most people don’t actually eat books.

The research also suggests changing VAT to ‘penalise’ unhealthy foods with the 20% levy. In certain circumstances this is already the case- chocolate items are standard rated for VAT while bread is not- but using VAT in this way would be clumsy and likely to cause problems. Just look at the poor pasty-munchers.

However, Dr Rayner does not advocate a tax on saturated fat, as has previously been mooted, and as adopted by Denmark last year. He claims that, by avoiding foods high in saturated fat, people might replace them with foods high in carbohydrates – and these foods tend to also be high in salt. The overall effect on health might be negative. With a soft drink tax, people would most likely lead to people swapping to low calorie or sugar free drinks, which, he claims, would still be “beneficial for health”. At least until someone decides that aspartame is bad for you. Oh, wait…

So what do you think? Is the Scottish alcohol levy the first step on a slippery Nanny State slope of Government-approved imbibing? Would a fizzy drink tax work? Surely it is the takeaways, fry-ups and ready meals causing the nation’s obesity issue rather than the can they swill it down with. Besides who are the Government to tell us what we can or can’t drink?

TOPICS:   Economy


  • peacheyd
    People are fat because they are lazy and eat to much, not because of the price of food.
  • Stan L.
    I have it on good authourity that Glaswegians in need of a strong lager actually prefer Calsberg Special Brew .Tennents Special sells better In England.
  • Stan L.
    Or Super.
  • Milky
    Drink tap water with some juice in it from a sigg bottle (or similar) & never again buy a crappy "fizzy pop" which is mainly bloody water in the first place. tax fizzy drinks except in pubs bars etc where a less than decent non alcoholic assortment is available for the fella driving his mates around! whilst we're at it please may we have another tax in order to return the pop can / bottle & not have it ending up as crappy litter blowing down the street!? well in other countries & feels less like nannying.
  • Kevin
    'At least until someone decides that aspartame is bad for you. Oh, wait…' Yeah if you're some sort of conspiracy freak who doesn't live in reality! And there are alternatives already being used so it's becoming a moot point anyway.
  • Tweedskin
    Or, you know, tax the companies that are making the drinks rather than taxing the consumers? They're the ones that make all the profits. I wonder how much Coca-Cola donate (not through tax) to the NHS?
  • Wongaporkpies
    Personally we should show the government 7up as in fingers to this idea.
  • Alfred H.
    Seagulls aren't fat & they eat chips all day. Perhaps we should eat them, after we've bummed them of course.
  • Nick H.
    YES! Seagulls are the future! Foxes are so 90's!!
  • Haggis
    "The research team claims government intervention by way of taxation can be justified when the market fails to provide the ‘optimum’ good for society’s well-being" No chance of trying that with the banking or energy markets naturally.
  • peter
    people will not like to buy a can of coke with a 20% tax increase i mean how much money dose the goverment think we can spare, be funny if the guys who worked for fizzy drink factorys went our of buisness caus nobody wanted to buy over priced shit, and more people will unemployed then the goverment will find something els to increese tax to make up for all their money mistakes , its great to see the goverment are so concerned for our health they are willing to charge us more to help us... any excuse right?
  • Dick
    So that will be £2.40 for a can of pop in that London now. Why not tax fatty foods at 10%, but discount healthy foods at 10%. The money saved can go on administration of this and other petty taxes. Or alternatively, make it the law that you have to abuse any fat cunts that you see in the street.
  • klingelton
    so that works the same way as increasing tax and duty on fuel in an attempt to get us all out of our cars? oh wait - that didn't work did it, people are still driving their cars.
  • JonB
    Volume for volume, fruit juice* has the same amount of carbohydrate/sugar as cola and more calories. I presume they will slap this tax on OJ as well then? * That's 100% fruit juice, not watered down squash-a-like.

What do you think?

Connect with Facebook, Twitter, or just enter your email to sign in and comment.

Your comment