Dieticians call for 20% tax on sugary drinks

[Canmorite]

Canadians should pay a 10 to 20 per cent tax on sugar-sweetened drinks, the Dietitians of Canada said in a new position statement Tuesday.

As global health officials try to crack down on sugar consumption, the national organization suggests the move would make Canadians think twice about buying sugary drinks. They’re calling for an excise tax of up to 20 per cent – that means the tax would be worked into the price consumers would see on store shelves.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2506310/sh...-curb-obesity/

It's worked for cigarettes, and sugar is turning out to be a major health concern. Personally, I'm all for it. If you're going to eat a shitty diet all the time, you should have to pay proportionally more than others who choose to eat healthy, as we all share the burden with healthcare costs down the road.

In Mexico, health officials have already slapped a 10 per cent tax on sugary drinks. It started in 2012 – one year later, there was a 12 per cent reduction in sales, researchers suggested.

Thoughts?

[A790]

Do it.

[jdmXSI]

All for it.if they tax the shit out of alcohol and tobacco, tax soft drinks and junk food.

[speedog]

Sugary drinks only? What of sugary snacks or snacks loaded with simple starches or fat - are these better for us than sugary drinks?

Now I don't drink many sugary drinks but I do enjoy the occasional Coke or Slurpee and a 20% hit still wouldn't deter me.

[mazdavirgin]

Where do you draw the line? Should be also add 20% to ice cream, candy bars, etc...

Blaming sugary drinks is pretty damn stupid. You ever check how much sugar there is in most baked goods? Hell why not tax people who get coffees that are loaded with sugar as well?

I don't think you can legislate people into not being fat...

[Masked Bandit]

If the approach is going to be a simple tax on unhealthy food, why stop at sugary drinks? What about potato chips, chocolate bars, etc. The challenge I see with that strategy is where do you draw the line? On the surface something like a granola bar seems like a decent alternative but a lot of those are just as bad as a handful of cookies or a candy bar. What about "fruit drink" as opposed to fruit juice? It gets pretty hard to tell.

What about additional costs to using the healthcare system, sort of like a deductible. I think in the U.S. they call it a co-pay (not sure though)? Perhaps if it cost a few bucks to see a doctor people would do more to take care of themselves. Obviously there's a lot more to that conversation.

[Darkane]

I would suggest a tax on high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). That shit is killing people, and incidentally most of the sugar content of pop and "sugary" drinks.

HFCS is also in some food so it would help there as well.

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by Darkane
I would suggest a tax on high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). That shit is killing people, and incidentally most of the sugar content of pop and "sugary" drinks.

HFCS is also in some food so it would help there as well.

That's mostly junk science. HFCS is not really much better or worse than actual sugar.

http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skept...rce=feedburner

Honey is just as bad for you as processed sugars no matter whatever anyone wants to believe.

[killramos]

No offence but if a pop costs a 1.25 or 1.50 I'm still going to buy it.

This is just an excuse for another tax on yet another thing in our day to day lives.

[SkiBum5.0]

While we are at it let's get those damn couches, chairs, and work desks as sitting is the new smoking.

[riander5]

Dont tax sugary drinks, tax fat people

Tax them more for the healthcare, knee and hip replacements they are going to incurr

Oh and for fucks sakes make them buy two seats on airplanes

[kenny]

Surprised fruit juices wouldn't be included they are just as sugary (sometimes more so than pop).

[sexualbanana]

12-packs are getting up there in price already.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Canmorite

It's worked for cigarettes

Er, doubtful. Correlation does not equal causation. What worked for cigarettes is the fact that they kill you in awful ways (and this was hammered home repeatedly), plus make you feel like crap.

You can still get smokes for cheap on the black market, no different than anything else. And if someone wants to smoke a pack a day, they are going to do it.

Originally posted by killramos
No offence but if a pop costs a 1.25 or 1.50 I'm still going to buy it.

This is just an excuse for another tax on yet another thing in our day to day lives.

Nails it. Dude's on a roll lately.

I've been noticing a real change in societies attitude towards eating healthy (in a good way). Everyone is watching what they eat, trying to "eat healthy". I think it will take another decade to notice, but I personally think there has been a bit of a health revolution in America that will take a while to be noticed in the stats (losing weight and being healthier takes time).

I do drink too much pop though. I bet I'd lose 10 lbs over the course of a year if I stopped drinking it. Coke is just too damn tasty though!

[jwslam]

Originally posted by killramos
No offence but if a pop costs a 1.25 or 1.50 I'm still going to buy it.

This is just an excuse for another tax on yet another thing in our day to day lives.

You mean I'm not already being gouged on a $2.79 fountain pop?

**Asian mentality**: If you're charging me $2.50 for a bottled water, or $2.79 for a bottomless fountain drink, guess what I'm going for.

[Dave P]

haha now I am going to have to smuggle back cases of Diet Coke for the wife along with logs of chew from Montana haha.

[killramos]

Whether or not pop is worth what is charged is a completely different topic.

Fountain pop is almost universally overcharged. In a restaurant you pay a few bucks for what costs the restaurant a few cents of syrup. In a movie theatre its even more extreme.

So long as Cineplex can get away with charging 5 dollars for a medium coke i see absolutely no one drinking less coke because of a 20% tax on it.

And at what point would the tax actually be applied?

People talk about HFCS taxing, well in that case i bet it doesn't increase the price of a coke by more than a few pennies.

On what the re sellers pay for the coke? Now maybe its 6 pennies? Who cares.

If its on the retail price? Great its jumped to a quarter a can or a buck at a movie. Again Who cares, I'm still going to buy it. And likely in the exact same quantity.

No this has absolutely nothing to do with deterring people from unhealthy activities. Its just yet another way for people to reach into everyone's wallets.

And if you want to justify it as to offset costs of unhealthy people in the medical system. OK. So I expect my provincial income taxes to come down proportionally.

You cant just keep adding taxes on without taking others away. Its the definition of sustainability. And don't even start on taxes on taxes. Like GST on inflated sugar tax amounts.

[JRSC00LUDE]

How about if you want to incentivize the population to live better give them a 20% tax credit for buying healthy foods, exercise equipment/clothing, sport memberships?

Taxation? More like extortion.

[killramos]

Cause tax credits are just a payout to the rich you silly willy

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
How about if you want to incentivize the population to live better give them a 20% tax credit for buying healthy foods, exercise equipment/clothing, sport memberships?

Taxation? More like extortion.

We can do a revenue neutral tax like that.

I won't do 20% tax for soft drinks but 20% tax on all processed drinks that has more than 10g of sugar per 250ml.

Then turn around and put Body Break back on TV and Youtube or something or other health initiatives.