含热量饮料税:无牙解决方案?

IF 0.4 Q4 ECONOMICS Economists Voice Pub Date : 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1515/ev-2017-0009
E. Cohen, Jehan deFonseka, R. Mcgowan
{"title":"含热量饮料税:无牙解决方案?","authors":"E. Cohen, Jehan deFonseka, R. Mcgowan","doi":"10.1515/ev-2017-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We lay out a framework for assessing if calorie sweetened beverage taxes are effective, and, concluding they are not, provide recommendations for better solutions. Similar taxes, known as sin taxes, generally have three specific goals: 1) to lower consumption of the offending substance or activity; 2) to minimize the black market; and 3) to generate government revenues. We find that on the whole, caloric sweetened beverage taxes fail to meet each of the criteria for effective sin taxes. They neither meaningfully lower consumption of caloric sweeteners generally, nor do they provide for a healthier alternative. They are straightforward to geographically circumvent, and there are many carve outs which are not taxed, dampening the impact they could have on the consumption of caloric sweeteners. Although these taxes are potentially a significant source of tax revenue, such collections are largely and disproportionately borne by the poor. Instead, we propose enacting a broad policy on a national level consisting of three components: 1) removing government support for caloric sweeteners, 2) levying a federal excise tax on caloric sweeteners at the producer level, and 3) investing in research, implementation of significant subsidies, and development and transmission of explicit government advice in favor of foods that are irrefutably beneficial for the vast majority of human beings.","PeriodicalId":42390,"journal":{"name":"Economists Voice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/ev-2017-0009","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Caloric Sweetened Beverage Taxes: A Toothless Solution?\",\"authors\":\"E. Cohen, Jehan deFonseka, R. Mcgowan\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/ev-2017-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract We lay out a framework for assessing if calorie sweetened beverage taxes are effective, and, concluding they are not, provide recommendations for better solutions. Similar taxes, known as sin taxes, generally have three specific goals: 1) to lower consumption of the offending substance or activity; 2) to minimize the black market; and 3) to generate government revenues. We find that on the whole, caloric sweetened beverage taxes fail to meet each of the criteria for effective sin taxes. They neither meaningfully lower consumption of caloric sweeteners generally, nor do they provide for a healthier alternative. They are straightforward to geographically circumvent, and there are many carve outs which are not taxed, dampening the impact they could have on the consumption of caloric sweeteners. Although these taxes are potentially a significant source of tax revenue, such collections are largely and disproportionately borne by the poor. Instead, we propose enacting a broad policy on a national level consisting of three components: 1) removing government support for caloric sweeteners, 2) levying a federal excise tax on caloric sweeteners at the producer level, and 3) investing in research, implementation of significant subsidies, and development and transmission of explicit government advice in favor of foods that are irrefutably beneficial for the vast majority of human beings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economists Voice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/ev-2017-0009\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economists Voice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/ev-2017-0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economists Voice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ev-2017-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们提出了一个框架来评估卡路里加糖饮料税是否有效,并得出结论,他们不是,提供更好的解决方案的建议。类似的税,被称为罪恶税,通常有三个具体目标:1)减少对犯罪物质或活动的消费;2)尽量减少黑市;3)增加政府收入。我们发现,总的来说,含热量饮料税不符合有效罪恶税的每一个标准。它们既不能有效地降低热量甜味剂的消耗,也不能提供更健康的替代品。它们在地理上很容易被规避,而且有许多免税产品是不征税的,这削弱了它们对高热量甜味剂消费的影响。虽然这些税收可能是税收收入的重要来源,但这些税收主要由穷人承担,而且比例不成比例。相反,我们建议在国家层面制定一项广泛的政策,包括三个组成部分:1)取消政府对高热量甜味剂的支持,2)在生产商层面对高热量甜味剂征收联邦消费税,以及3)投资研究,实施重大补贴,开发和传播明确的政府建议,支持对绝大多数人有益的食品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Caloric Sweetened Beverage Taxes: A Toothless Solution?
Abstract We lay out a framework for assessing if calorie sweetened beverage taxes are effective, and, concluding they are not, provide recommendations for better solutions. Similar taxes, known as sin taxes, generally have three specific goals: 1) to lower consumption of the offending substance or activity; 2) to minimize the black market; and 3) to generate government revenues. We find that on the whole, caloric sweetened beverage taxes fail to meet each of the criteria for effective sin taxes. They neither meaningfully lower consumption of caloric sweeteners generally, nor do they provide for a healthier alternative. They are straightforward to geographically circumvent, and there are many carve outs which are not taxed, dampening the impact they could have on the consumption of caloric sweeteners. Although these taxes are potentially a significant source of tax revenue, such collections are largely and disproportionately borne by the poor. Instead, we propose enacting a broad policy on a national level consisting of three components: 1) removing government support for caloric sweeteners, 2) levying a federal excise tax on caloric sweeteners at the producer level, and 3) investing in research, implementation of significant subsidies, and development and transmission of explicit government advice in favor of foods that are irrefutably beneficial for the vast majority of human beings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Economists Voice
Economists Voice ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
25.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: This journal is a non-partisan forum for economists to present innovative policy ideas or engaging commentary on the issues of the day. Readers include professional economists, lawyers, policy analysts, policymakers, and students of economics. Articles are short, 600-2000 words, and are intended to contain deeper analysis than is found on the Op-Ed page of the Wall Street Journal or New York Times, but to be of comparable general interest. We welcome submitted Columns from any professional economist. Letters to the editor are encouraged and may comment on any Column or Letter. Letters must be less than 300 words.
期刊最新文献
Natural Interest Rate and Money Interest Rates An Evolutionary Path Towards a European Monetary Fund The Fairy Tale of Low Inflation in the Euro Area Food Insecurity and Health Outcomes The Economists’ Voice: Special Issue on Nutrition and Poverty Introduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1