Should We Tax Unhealthy Foods Like We Do Tobacco/Cigarettes Products?
- Hanna G
- Jul 12, 2020
- 4 min read
Updated: Jan 3, 2021
Since 1865, American citizens have been brainwashed into believing that cigarettes are good for your health. Fortunately, there have recently been great medical discoveries that have suggested that cigarettes are extremely harmful and are one of the major causes of lung cancer in the United States. Fortunately and recently, the government has placed a tax on cigarettes because of this terrible medical discovery.
The government has placed a 10% tax on cigarettes to prevent people from smoking since the government has recently figured out about the terrible aftermath of tobacco. This tax has prevented millions of tobacco/cigarette deaths in the United States.
The government taxed tobacco so that they could prevent people from buying it since it is a large reason as to why many people die in the United States. Why not place a tax on unhealthy foods like meat, dairy, eggs, sugar, salty food, and fatty food since they are also a large cause of death?
If there was a tax on unhealthy food, it would prevent most people from buying them, which would result in saving millions of lives. When it comes to preventing people from buying certain products, public health decision-makers have two main options. One is to inform the people through packaging and labeling. They would use labeling to lead potential consumers away from the product. Another would be politely nudging the consumer by using incentives. An example of this would be giving 5% cash back to the customer when buying a stalk of broccoli or any other healthy option.
Maybe if food industries started to display nutritious foods more prominently and tax the unhealthy food, that could promote and facilitate healthier dietary choices. Would this idea work? Yes! There is a lot of evidence that does support this idea. As seen in Michael Gregor M.D. FACLM's video: "Would taxing Unhealthy Foods Improve Public Health?", the more unhealthy foods are taxed, the lower the consumption is. It also works vice versa for healthy foods. The lower the prices of fruits and vegetables are, the higher the consumption.
Many cigarette companies have argued that the taxes on cigarettes are "unfair" and "burdening the poor the most." The public health community responded by saying: "cancer is unfair," and "cancer burdens the poor the most." They also stated that a cigarette tax would financially benefit the poor the most.
There is a fake committee that was created by the tobacco industry to support the tobacco industry called: Committee Against Unfair Taxes. This committee was "organized and funded by the tobacco industry." This tactic is not unusual in the business world. Many committees like this are created to support certain companies, unfortunately. This kind of tactic is used a lot in the tobacco industry when it comes to arguing and fighting over tax percentages (usually when they want them lowered) and is also used to buy politicians that can support their products and companies.
A study was conducted where some researchers put people in a high-tech 3D supermarket simulator. They told these people to go shopping as if they were in their local supermarket. But, this simulated supermarket had discounted the fresh produce (fruits and vegetables) by 25%. This discount allowed for a 25% increase in the buying of fruits and vegetables. This is great for virtual purchases, but what about reality? A large insurance company in South Africa decided to test this theory in real life. They offered up to 25% cash back on any healthy food purchase. This is up to 500 dollars per month (United States currency). There was a large increase in the consumption of vegetables, fruits, oats, and whole grains. There was also a large decrease in the consumption of foods like meat, dairy, eggs, sugar, fatty foods, and salty foods. This experiment proved the theory that an unhealthy food tax would benefit the public.
Many other countries have enforced taxes on sugary or salty foods. Denmark was the first country to ever enforce a tax on saturated fat: meats, dairy, and eggs. Unfortunately, within only one year of having this tax, the food industry removed it because huge food companies claimed that by placing this tax, the millions of employees working for those companies would have to be let go due to financial reasons. This information shows that the government only cares about the health of its economy and not the health of its people. The most unfortunate part about the termination was that the tax was removed right after the positive effects started to shine through. Researchers "conclude[d] that the introduction of the saturated fat tax contributed to reducing the intake of saturated fat among Danish consumers." This quote states how since the beginning of the tax, there has been a large decrease in the intake of meat and dairy products.
Overall, there have been many studies showing the possible positive effects of this tax. Unfortunately, the food industry plays a prominent role in the placing of taxes and the removal of taxes. If a tax does not benefit their company, they will try their best to remove the tax using their power and money.
For more information visit:
Comments