California Voters Just Approved The First Soda Tax In The Nation

  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Nov 05, 2014 10:23 PM GMT
    California Voters Just Approved The First Soda Tax In The Nation

    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/11/05/3589161/berkeley-first-soda-tax/
  • Bowyn_Aerrow

    Posts: 357

    Nov 06, 2014 1:11 AM GMT
    Yes because taxation of cigarettes worked so well to break people from that habit. Its bound to work for soda. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2014 3:13 AM GMT
    Bowyn_Aerrow saidYes because taxation of cigarettes worked so well to break people from that habit. Its bound to work for soda. icon_rolleyes.gif

    Actually cigarette taxes do reduce smoking. The goal of taxes on cigarettes and alcohol is to underwrite the public health costs that are incurred by their abuse. Why should **I** pay for your lung cancer, or liver cirrhosis?

    Likewise, if sugary drinks are causing obesity and other health problems, let the soda consumers themselves cover the public health cost for it. Seems like a sound Right Wing principle to me. icon_wink.gif
  • Bowyn_Aerrow

    Posts: 357

    Nov 06, 2014 3:18 AM GMT
    I see, so this is why health care for lung cancer and liver problems in the USA is the best in the whole world?

    /sarcasm font.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2014 10:51 AM GMT
    none issue
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2014 12:16 PM GMT
    Bowyn_Aerrow saidI see, so this is why health care for lung cancer and liver problems in the USA is the best in the whole world?

    /sarcasm font.

    No, merely the most expensive. But that's due to the US health care industry. Where we pay more for our care and get less.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2014 2:08 PM GMT
    It would seem nanny staters just don't learn:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/business/global/fat-tax-in-denmark-is-repealed-after-criticism.html?_r=0HTTP ADDRESS GOES HERE
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2014 2:27 PM GMT
    in the US any change, tho tiny and or esoteric, is a great thing
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2014 9:13 PM GMT
    Bowyn_Aerrow saidI see, so this is why health care for lung cancer and liver problems in the USA is the best in the whole world?

    /sarcasm font.


    Do you have evidence or are you just reciting right wing talking points?
    Because I have evidence from the national institute of health:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3228562/
  • muscleboundfe...

    Posts: 392

    Nov 06, 2014 10:07 PM GMT
    Good for them I fully support extra taxation of sodas, cans and most fast food.
  • rip12

    Posts: 63

    Nov 07, 2014 2:45 AM GMT
    i dont know how they can call it the first in the nation when baltimore has had a tax on soft drinks for the last 4-5 years??

    hasnt been a good thing in bmore though - pepsi had a large bottling plant in the city and they have since closed up and gone to the suburbs

    most people go to the suburbs if they buy soft drinks in large quantities where the tax doesnt apply

    people are more innovative than the politicians realize - they will find ways around this stuff
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 07, 2014 4:25 AM GMT
    Now tax this little bitch ass company and all of his cousins and the like.
    975641-ht_cheetah_071119_ssh.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 07, 2014 1:23 PM GMT
    metta8 saidCalifornia Voters Just Approved The First Soda Tax In The Nation

    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/11/05/3589161/berkeley-first-soda-tax/



    Oh really?icon_wink.gif


    http://www.legis.state.wv.us/WVCODe/Code.cfm?chap=11&art=19


    Four states currently impose an excise tax on soda:

    Arkansas ($0.21 cents per gallon of bottled/canned soft drink product; $2 per gallon of soft drink syrup)
    Tennessee (1.9 percent of gross receipts on manufacturing, producing, or importing soft drinks)
    Virginia (the tax ranges from $50 on gross receipts of $100,000 or less, to $33,000 on gross receipts over $50 million)
    West Virginia ($0.01 per 16.9 fluid ounces or half liter of bottled soft drink, $0.80 per gallon of soft drink syrup; $0.01 per ounce of dry mixture used to make soft drinks).
    Twenty-three jurisdictions tax soft drinks at the normal sales tax rate, even in those states where “grocery” items are exempted from normal sales tax or taxed at a reduced rate. And, depending on the state’s definition of “sugary beverage,” items like sports drinks, energy drinks, and flavored water also may be subject to the excise tax.

    Why tax sugary beverages? Studies have shown that increased consumption of sugary beverages directly relates to weight gain and obesity. States want to combat this problem and reduce rising health care costs associated with treating medical conditions caused by being overweight, which include an increased risk of developing heart disease, diabetes, stroke, and hypertension. The theory is that a “soda tax” will dissuade consumers from purchasing soft drinks. People would then drink less of them, leading to lower obesity rates and health care costs. States are also able to use the revenue from sugary beverage taxes to fund health programs aimed at education, prevention, and wellness programs to further combat obesity.

    Critics argue that taxing sugary beverages will not have much effect on obesity rates. Sugar-sweetened beverages only account for about 6 percent of caloric consumption, so there are other sources of those extra calories people consume every day—consumers can simply substitute other products for soda. A Northwestern University study found that most obese people actually drink diet soda, which does not contain sugar, so a sugary beverage tax would have no beneficial effect on those individuals. Additionally, economists argue that sugary beverage taxes would disproportionately affect lower income individuals.

    While some states have repealed their sugary beverage taxes (Louisiana, Maine, South Carolina, and Washington, to name a few), and others have been unsuccessful in passing legislation, the push to tax soft drinks is stronger than ever. In 2009, Congress considered a federal excise tax on soda of $0.03 per 12 ounces to help fund the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In 2011, 14 states considered legislation implementing excise taxes on soda. According to one report from the Tax Foundation, these taxes could raise the price of sugary beverages anywhere from 68 to 264 percent.

    The California and Illinois bills are {edit}just the latest {end edit}in a long list of attempts to enact taxes on sugary beverages. No matter what the legislature calls them—“soda taxes,” “soft drink taxes” or “sugar-sweetened beverage taxes”—the discussion about excise taxes on soft drinks is here to stay (at least for a while). Only time will tell if such legislation will be successful.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2014 6:43 PM GMT
    It's really pretty distinct from other soda taxes.

    For one, it only includes sugary beverages, unlike other taxes that were levied on soda and bottled water in general.

    Second, the rate is much higher. 1 cent per ounce is much more than 1 cent per 16.9 oz (as in WV) or 21 cents per gallon (as in AR). Arguably, these don't even seem like taxes at all because they are so low.

    I will be interested to see how it plays out. I am curious to see if there is actually a cost difference between sugary and non-sugary drinks facing the consumer come January 1st, or if the beverage companies will just absorb the difference and increase prices on everything else they sell.

    In any case, the ABA spent $2 million to try to defeat the tax in Berkeley. That's about $326 per "no" vote icon_eek.gif
  • Apparition

    Posts: 3521

    Nov 09, 2014 12:32 AM GMT
    we have 13% on pretty much any food that doesnt require preparation in canada, and cigarettes are about ten bucks, and cannot even be displayed in stores.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Dec 18, 2014 7:43 AM GMT
    Let's be clear.
    "California voters" sounds as if the entire state voted to tax soda.
    ONLY the city of Berkeley, California voted to tax soda.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2014 3:03 PM GMT
    change, even the smallest amount, is evilicon_twisted.gif