Health tax on unwholesome food is proposed in Sweden

[Stockholm]

Own translation from Dagens Nyheter (one of the two largest daily papers in Sweden)

As a way of addressing the fast increasing levels of obesity (in Sweden) the National Institute of Public Health (NIPH) proposes to raise taxes on unwholesome food and to lower VAT on wholesome
food.

A (government) report will later this year propose these actions to steer the Swedish populations eating habits.

- In the light of the seriousness of the situation we must act resolutely, but obviously the proposals must be based upon scientific grounds, says Liselotte Schäfer Elinder at NIPH to Göteborgsposten (Other paper).

She does not think it would be more strange to tax unwholesome food than to have special taxation for tobacco or alcohol.

- The food industry always complains that it would be too complicated but this (fat, sugar, energy levels) can be measured and it is not more complicated than to set other limits such as permillage of alcohol (in traffic legislation), says Liselotte Schäfer Elinder.

End of article

link to NIPH http://www.fhi.se/default____1417.aspx

[SoCalDem]

1. Instead of taxing the consumers, I would prefer taxing the PRODUCERS

of the foods, and challenging THEM to provide more wholesome foods :)

Or perhaps limiting licences for fast food outlets, like most communities limit licenses of liquor establishments..


Maybe if there were not a fast food joint every 50 feet, people might not be so "tempted"..

Another pro-active effort, might be to offer free/reduced rates memberships to gyms and/or to require vigorous exercise in schools at all levels..

People respond better to the carrot...save the stick for the last resort technique.:)

[TO Kid]

3. Right...

Because hey, we all know the producers would never pass it along to their customers.

[SoCalDem]

4. They might, but the goal is to get healthier food..

so the people will pay either way.. taxed for "bad" food, or pay more for REAL food.. I'd take option #2:)

[Stockholm]

5. It´s not clear yet who will be taxed but the result

is usually the same...

During NIPH´s studies they have turned to the US experiences. In a different article their talking about tests in food automates which is prized based on how healthy it is and in this test it steered the consumers towards the healthier alternatives.

One failed US experiment they mention is a small soda tax (?) in some states where the proceeds are given to health projects, but here they argue that the differences are to small to decrease the consumption of sodas - A tell tale sign of a huge increase for these products.

Membership to gyms etc. are tax deductible for employers but not yet for individuals (could be a good idea though).

Sport are obligatory in primary and secondary schools (at least 2x2 hrs per week) which is the same as back when I was in School.

I guess the problem is to find a solution which sufficiently steers the consumers (to halt future increases) and create positive means of adressing the problems for those who already suffer of obesity.

[SoCalDem]

6. "soda taxes"....

Here in California they were instututed as a RECYCLING measure..it had nothing to do with health issues.. They made the extra charge high enough to encourage people to recycle instead of tossing them..

[papau]

2. And Liverpool wants legal prostitution areas - :-)

Wonder how that would go over in the States?