There are a number of controversial things appearing on local ballots across the country, but for many cities one of the big ticket items is centered around condemning sugary drinks to the same “sin tax” currently enjoyed by alcohol and tobacco. Is this so-called “soda tax” actually going to be effective, and why is it even a point of consideration? Today, our Missoula dental office will dive into both of those.
Sugar is Costly
High sugar drinks, including soda, are often characterized by their relative inexpensiveness, but they do carry a massive hidden cost on individual, regional, and even national levels. Due largely to the incredibly inflated sugar levels in the average US diet, we have entered what is quite possibly the worst obesity crisis in history. With the estimated annual cost of obesity on taxpayers pushing 150 million dollars annually, far higher if you include consumer-paid costs, there is a lot to be gained economically by cutting out the sugars.
Low Income Impact
Unfortunately, due to the low purchase price of sugary drinks, they have most of their impact on those in the lowest socioeconomic levels. In fact, one of the major arguments against the soda tax is that it will essentially tax the poorest of the population needlessly, as many experts believe that those that have become accustomed to high sugar drinks will just pay through the tax. While healthy alternatives are typically exempt from the tax, such as sweet beverages containing over 50 percent fresh fruits and vegetables, it is unclear whether the tax will be enough to bridge the gap.
Our Thoughts
While ad campaigns costing in excess of tens of millions on behalf of soda companies claim this is a “grocery tax,” and will have an impact on grocery prices as a whole, that is just untrue. In reality, the current proposed taxes are actually quite low, and felt only at the distributor level (not in grocery stores). It would be interesting to see what a larger sin tax on sugary drinks could do to subsidy the cost of fruit and vegetable alternatives.
Of course, in addition to the obesity impact, sugar is bad for oral health. A reduction in the widespread accessibility of soda and other sugary drinks over healthier alternatives could lead to healthier teeth and people in Missoula and across the country. Is a relatively small tax on distributors enough to accomplish that? The jury is still out; it’s a start, at least.
