Tax on Soda and Sugary Drinks - Free Essay Sample.

In 2018, the UK government introduced a tax on high-sugar drinks and some campaigners are lobbying for this indirect tax to be extended to other foods including snacks and cereals that have a high sugar content. Is this an effective and equitable form of government intervention in a market to achieve desired changes in consumer behaviour?

A typical 20-ounce bottle of a sugared soft drink from a vending maching contains 250 calories. To convince voters to tax soda we need more than just and analogy we have to convince them that soda is as bad as tobacco. Neuropundits said that junk food literally alters the biological circuitry of our brains which is quite dangerous.

Soda Tax Is Not the Solution There has been a growing concern towards the issue of obesity and efforts were made by governmental and non-governmental organizations to tackle this health problem. New York City’s proposal for labeling regulations for the food and beverage industry marked the start of government intervention into the market to fight obesity, and many states soon followed suit.

Tax on soda is considered as a government’s intervention to regulate the consumption of these kinds of drinks. In fact, soda should be taxed in the United States because it discourages the consumption of soda, raises government funds, and makes people healthier. Firstly, taxes on sodas would decrease the consumption of soda.

The US Federal Government should implement a modest excise tax on soda to increase the average retail price of soda and discourage consumption. Adjusting the price paid for soft drinks would have a meaningful effect on consumer behavior.

In an attempt to correct this externality, the city of Berkley levied a tax of 1 cent per ounce, which is equivalent to 12 cents per can or 68 centers per two liter of soda. The model for this market is a supply and demand curve with a negative externality caused by consumption.

Soda taxes are the opposite, subjecting a narrow tax base to very high tax rates. Policymakers should also be aware that soda consumption has already been steadily declining. Enacting a tax on a product with this consumption pattern might result in a temporary spike in revenue, but will soon be followed by a revenue decline as consumers continue shifting their spending habits.

Advocates for such a tax may argue that individuals who harm themselves by overindulging in soda should be limited in their consumption. Since supply and demand are sensitive to market conditions, a tax would undoubtedly lower the quantity of soda demanded, particularly in low-income families where obesity and diabetes are most common.

Yes,there should be a tax on sugary drinks. Yes,there should be a tax on sugary drinks.If there was a tax on sugary drinks people might be more aware of the large amount they are consuming.This would also work to add money to the public roles which be used on programs like diabetes prevention that could save a lot more money in the long run.

Experts in healthcare, public health and economics are confident that a tax will reduce consumption and help to lower obesity and overweight rates in the United States. Without any real-life tests, it is hard to say how big the impact will be, but they are sure of one thing: as state budgets get tighter, fewer dollars will be spent on important.

A sugar tax is a tax on sugary drinks, also called a Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax (SSBT). Public health advocates say an SSBT in Australia and New Zealand could help reduce consumption of SSBs and thereby reduce obesity and other associated diseases. The United Kingdom has recently joined France, Hungary, Chile and Mexico in introducing a SSBT.

Junk Food tax is defined as“taxing less nutritional value food such as sugary pop while food with high nutritional value will not be taxed.” (Rupert Taylor, 2009). Junk Food is generally consumed by people with a wide range of ages, a majority of children, adults or even elderly love consuming junk food.