Raising the price of sugar-sweetened sodas, coffees, teas and energy, sports and fruit drinks by an average of 31% reduced consumer purchases of those drinks by a third, according to a new analysis of restrictions implemented in five US cities.

“What we measured is how consumers change their consumption in response to price changes,” said study author Scott Kaplan, an assistant professor of economics at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland.

“For every 1% increase in price, we found a 1% decrease in purchases of these products,” Kaplan said. “The decrease in consumer purchases occurred almost immediately after the taxes were put in place and stayed that way over the next three years of the study.”

    • HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Gonna pay taxes to give to the sugar companies to get taxes more when we buy the sugar to discourage us from buying so much of the sugar we are already paying taxes for

      This seems like such an efficient ways to run things.

  • DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    Gotta push that cost and responsibility on to the consumer, wouldn’t want the companies making these products then investing trillions on marketing manipulating people in to buying them, to make a little less profit

      • BloodSlut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        fruit juices can also have actual nutrition like vitamins, minerals, and fiber.

        straight up taxation of drinks, carbs, or calories isnt a smart or viable solution. instead we should be looking at taxing highly processed foods and foods with excessive added sugars, stop subsidizing unhealthy foods like corn used for sugars and factory farmed beef, and start subsidizing foods with redeemable nutritional value

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Have you read the ingredients on most fruit juices? When’s the last time you had fruit juice with bits of actual fruit? I don’t think I’ve noticed fruit in anything besides orange juice and lemonade, and not most of those

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Sugar sweetened”. They’re not talking black coffee, they’re talking venti mocha latte - are they really any different from a milkshake?

      Have you looked at the ingredient list on fruit juices? Most of the cartons in my grocery have water first, then high fructose corn syrup as the second ingredient

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Anything to increase taxes! You’re for taxing things you disagree with, well be ready to embrace them taxing things you agree with too, since supporting sin taxes places the government as the arbiters of judgment between appropriate and discouraged, and they have a vested interest in everything becoming discouraged.

  • Duranie@literature.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Where I live they tried this tax, but eventually repealed it. I think part of the problem is that it wasn’t applied in a way that makes sense. It was referred to as a “sugar tax” on sugar sweetened drinks, yet it taxed artificially sweetened/sugar free drinks under the same umbrella.

  • Fleur__@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fantastic, I’m always for taxes that encourage people to live healthier lives! Healthier population means less has to be spent on healthcare for those people

  • ares35@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    and then beverage peddlers will ‘have to’ raise prices to make up for ‘lost’ profits… which will further deter sales… rinse–repeat.

    • lemonuri@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      For a moment I thought you were yelling to try and stop a taxi for overweight people.

      On a more serious note, they were going to introduce a sugar tax here in Germany a couple of years ago but politicians instead decided to ask companies nicely to please reduce sugar in their products. It’s been going great, so far.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’d hope they drink water, but you really need to watch whether it affects alcohol consumption. That would not be a good tradeoff

  • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fuck this stupid shit. It’s just the government positioning things as bad, sinful, evil, or unhealthy so they can tax more, and reap more revenue. Adults should be free to make their own decisions about this sort of stuff. Embrace this and you’ll soon find something you like up for sin tax the next time the government wants to raise taxes.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As someone with many sins, I’m still all for it. If it helps me cut back, fantastic. If it helps make up for my extra cost on society, fair enough