It has been proven that a tax of 1 cent per ounce for beverages with added caloric sweetener would raise $14.9 billion in the first year alone. A 1 cent per ounce tax would increase the price of a 20 oz. drink by 15-20%. In Minnesota, this would cause tax revenue of $303,997,336 in 2014 alone. This is only one of many different tax plans. Another one of these plans is to “tax beverages that exceed a threshold of grams of added caloric sweetener or of kilocalories per ounce. If this approach were used, we would recommend that the threshold be set at 1 g of sugar per ounce.” Another would be a “tax assessed per gram of added sugar” (Brownell et al. nejm.org); this one would be hard to enforce, as manufacturers would just make new products. If an excise tax would be imposed on producers and wholesalers, which would most likely be passed onto retailers, who would incorporate that tax into the retail price; which would make the consumer aware of what they would be paying. Manufacturers in the US are scared of what would happen if a fat tax was passed. In 2008, PepsiCo threatened to move corporate headquarters out of New York if the state implemented an 18% sales tax on sugar sweetened beverages. The beverage industry has also created an interest group called Americans Against Food Taxes. This suggests that there could be a considerable impact on consumption. In the US, the following states have had interest in a fat tax: California, Vermont, Mississippi, New York, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. Not one of these states has passed a tax on sugar sweetened beverages. In all of these states the population has usually approved of a tax. In one poll in New York State, a fat tax was supported by 52% of the population and 72% support one if the revenue was to go to a program that would help prevent obesity in children and
It has been proven that a tax of 1 cent per ounce for beverages with added caloric sweetener would raise $14.9 billion in the first year alone. A 1 cent per ounce tax would increase the price of a 20 oz. drink by 15-20%. In Minnesota, this would cause tax revenue of $303,997,336 in 2014 alone. This is only one of many different tax plans. Another one of these plans is to “tax beverages that exceed a threshold of grams of added caloric sweetener or of kilocalories per ounce. If this approach were used, we would recommend that the threshold be set at 1 g of sugar per ounce.” Another would be a “tax assessed per gram of added sugar” (Brownell et al. nejm.org); this one would be hard to enforce, as manufacturers would just make new products. If an excise tax would be imposed on producers and wholesalers, which would most likely be passed onto retailers, who would incorporate that tax into the retail price; which would make the consumer aware of what they would be paying. Manufacturers in the US are scared of what would happen if a fat tax was passed. In 2008, PepsiCo threatened to move corporate headquarters out of New York if the state implemented an 18% sales tax on sugar sweetened beverages. The beverage industry has also created an interest group called Americans Against Food Taxes. This suggests that there could be a considerable impact on consumption. In the US, the following states have had interest in a fat tax: California, Vermont, Mississippi, New York, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. Not one of these states has passed a tax on sugar sweetened beverages. In all of these states the population has usually approved of a tax. In one poll in New York State, a fat tax was supported by 52% of the population and 72% support one if the revenue was to go to a program that would help prevent obesity in children and