ACSH sends kudos to the Los Angeles Times editorial board for their common-sense analysis and rejection of two proposed taxes on sodas. They rightfully state that when it comes to so-called sin taxes, tobacco is simple. Food and drink are complicated.
In El Monte, Calif., voters will be deciding whether to pass a tax not just on beverages high in added sugar, but also those that contain any amount of fruit juice concentrate which would include, for example, any 100 percent fruit juice made from concentrate, such as many varieties of nutrient-packed orange juice.
These poorly thought-out proposals don t consider nutrition at all, says ACSH s Dr. Ruth Kava. Their supposed benefit would be to simply reduce sugar consumption and they might end up actually impairing rather than improving nutritional status.
Further, the El Monte tax and a similar one in Richmond, Calif., would tax businesses so the retailer would pay the fee, and then decide how to recoup that money from customers. How this is supposed to reduce consumers consumption of sugar is anyone s guess. Of course, if the El Monte officials real goal was to simply generate more revenue, then they will succeed.
ACSH s Dr. Elizabeth Whelan argues, Some just assume that the way to deal with health issues is to tax them out of existence. But poorly conceived taxes will have unintended, and often counterproductive, consequences. We applaud the L.A. Times for clarifying this issue.
