A Penny for Your Sugar: Setting a Price on Sin

By :: April 1st, 2015

What do you have to drink in your refrigerator? I’ve got kids in grade school, and our fridge always holds their favorite: Juice boxes filled with 100% apple juice. I felt pretty good about that “100%” until I looked at the label. There are 18 grams of sugar in one 6.75-ounce serving. Coca Cola? Six ounces contain 19.5 grams. Oops.

TaxHoundFinal[1] (2)

Look: Sugar tastes great, but in excess, it can do a real number on a waistline. I can take some solace in the fact that my kids’ juice has no added sugars. The American Heart Association recommends that we all cut back on added sugar to help curb obesity. Sugar-added beverages are pretty popular, and given the US obesity rate and its associated costs, they pose a problem.

Can the problem be solved with a sin tax?

Or in this case, as it’s more palatably known, a “soda tax?” (That is not an all-inclusive term, it just rolls off the tongue more easily than “sugar-added beverage tax.”)

The theory: Tax sugary beverages, and consumers will buy a healthier alternative in order to avoid the tax. Over time, we’d reduce our consumption of sweetened beverages, reduce our chances of putting on extra pounds, and use less medical care. Does this theory hold (sugarless) water? Not much, though early data on Mexico’s year-old soda tax show some promise.

US communities have been trying for several years to levy soda taxes in the name of good health. Soda purchases are falling, and there is some evidence that people are buying different drinks without an extra tax. But are we buying healthier, sin-free drinks?

Are we are all aware of our sugar sins? A new study out of the University of Connecticut finds that “although most parents know that soda is not good for children, many still believe that other sugary drinks [like flavored water, or orange-flavored or other foil-wrapped drinks] are healthy options.” (At least I’m not alone… though nobody’s taxing 100% apple juice. Yet.)

Maybe a sin tax is just the thing shoppers need to help them live a life on the light and healthful. We may soon find out.

After 30 failures around the country, soda tax backers finally claimed one legislative success, and another larger effort could be on the way. Thanks in part to an expensive campaign, last November Berkeley, California, became the first city in the nation to pass a tax on the distribution of sugar-sweetened drinks—a penny-per-ounce. (Berkeley started collecting the tax in March, so it’s still too early to tell whether it is changing consumer behavior.)

And this spring, the Vermont legislature will consider a statewide 2 cent-per-ounce tax on any sugar-sweetened beverage.

In Vermont, like Berkeley, the soda tax would be an excise tax paid at the wholesale level. It wouldn’t be like a sales tax that you pay at the register and see on your receipt. Consumers might notice the extra cost of their purchase, but they won't know its source. The higher cost might be enough to make them choose different beverages.

Now, if you want to change consumers’ behavior with a tax, the tax should be “salient.” That’s tax-speak for “able to be seen and felt.” You can see exactly why in this neat study on tax salience and tax rates by Amy Finkelstein.

Here’s where things get complicated: What does it mean to be salient? A 2009 paper by Raj Chetty, Adam Looney, and Korey Kroft found that a shelf price with a built-in excise tax is more likely to reduce demand than a tacked-on sales tax. Tatiana Homonoff and Jacob Goldin (a former TPC intern) decided to look more closely at the consumers. They found that low-income consumers responded to both tax-inclusive shelf prices and the tax added at the register. High-income customers were the ones likely to ignore the sales tax.

Back to Vermont: Imagine it enacts its sin tax. A mom strolls down a grocery aisle and sees a 12-pack of that orange-flavored drink, the one that isn’t soda but is subject to the tax, the one that she believes is healthy. It’s about $3 more expensive than it used to be. Will she keep strolling and find something else, or will she shrug and put it in her cart?

Now consider this. Vermont’s proposed soda tax is projected to raise $35 million. Did I mention that Vermont needs to close an expected budget shortfall? I’m sure Vermont lawmakers are concerned about the health of their constituents and their shopping choices, but they’re concerned about Vermont's fiscal health, too.

They expect a certain number of shoppers to “sin” in Vermont, and not buy their sugar-sweetened beverages in soda-tax-free New Hampshire, or drink something far less expensive and certainly sugarless, like tap water. They expect the temptation of those sweetened drinks to be just strong enough, and the sin tax to be just low enough, to bring in that $35 million.

So take heart, shoppers. A sweet little sin can be good, for both your taste buds and public coffers.

And if you’re like me, thinking about all of this might make you rethink your choices. I’ve “forgotten” to buy juice boxes for the past several days. The kids are happy with fridge-filtered water in a BPA-free bottle. Who knew?

The Tax Hound, publishing the first Wednesday of every month, helps make sense of tax policy for non-geeks and connects tax issues to the non-tax world. Need help? Post a comment!


Is a Consumption Tax Talk Making a Comeback?

By :: March 31st, 2015

Maybe it’s just because Congress is on spring break and tax wonks don’t have much to talk about, but suddenly the idea of a consumption tax is getting a new look. The tax plan proposed earlier this month by senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) is one form of the levy. And tax […]

Read More

Just the Facts, Ma’am: On Filing and Reform

By :: March 30th, 2015

Congress is in recess and the Daily Deduction will post Mondays until it reconvenes. We’ll be back to our regular schedule on April 13.  With just over two weeks till Tax Day, Treasury wants to clarify Affordable Care Act tax facts. It released fact sheets on common exemptions from the individual mandate, such as a […]

Read More

Do Senators Lee and Rubio Have a Secret Plan to Help Poor Families?

By :: March 27th, 2015

In its analysis of the tax reform plan proposed recently by Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Mike Lee (R-UT), the Tax Foundation assumed the proposal would make the new personal credit ($2,000 for singles and $4,000 for married couples) fully refundable. This assumption helps explain why the group concluded the Lee-Rubio plan would be highly progressive. Full refundability […]

Read More

A Little March Madness on the Hill

By :: March 27th, 2015

The “doc fix” passes the House. The House overwhelmingly approved the Medicare “doc fix” to replace automatic payment cuts (that Congress has delayed every year since 2003) with a temporary 0.5 percent annual hike in physician reimbursements. But the bipartisan deal, which CBO figures would add $141 billion to the deficit over 10 years, is […]

Read More

The Medicare “Doc Fix” That Isn’t

By :: March 26th, 2015

As you listen to House Democrats and Republicans sing kumbaya  over their bipartisan agreement to fix the Medicare physician payment system, keep one thing in mind: The doc fix doesn’t fix much, and what it does repair likely will add hundreds of billions of dollars to the debt in coming years. The bill would accomplish one […]

Read More

Sense and Sensibilities

By :: March 26th, 2015

The GOP House passes its budget. It promises to balance the books within 10 years by cutting spending by  $5.4 trillion. Cuts include $2 trillion from repeal of the Affordable Care Act, $1 trillion from  Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and $1 trillion  from other unspecified benefit programs. Another $500 billion would come […]

Read More

Tax Struggles and Tax Sneaks

By :: March 25th, 2015

Senate Finance Committee Chair Hatch wants a tax reform bill in 2015. Tax Analysts reports that the Utah Republican aims to mark up a bill later this year. Speaking at Arent Fox, LLP, yesterday, Hatch chided the Obama administration for “lacking engagement” in tax reform. While he wants to overhaul the entire tax system, Hatch […]

Read More

Budget Alternatives, Credits, and Advances

By :: March 24th, 2015

The House Republican Study Committee offers an alternative budget. The committee’s plan would cut spending by $7.1 trillion over the next decade but would give the Pentagon $570 billion for fiscal year 2016, well above the $523 billion spending cap set back in 2011. Revenues would change, too: The plan calls for just two individual […]

Read More

Bobby Jindal’s Revenue Enhancements

By :: March 23rd, 2015

Politicians looking to “enhance revenue” without raising taxes might want to take a close look at Louisiana, where Governor Bobby Jindal may have found the promised land of conservative tax policy. He’s promoting a plan to raise $526 million without a tax increase. His trick: Turn refundable business credits into non-refundable credits. With a refundable […]

Read More