Soda bans and soda taxes: My final verdict

As part of my Master’s in Public Policy at Johns Hopkins University, my Economics professor asked the class to examine soda taxes and soda bans to see if they have the potential to curb obesity. The following is the final part in this series where I share my policy brief examining the effectiveness of soda taxes and soda bans.

At the end of any good policy brief come the recommendations. Though I’m not an expert, I wanted to share my conclusions about the effectiveness of soda taxes and bans on decreasing soda consumption, reducing obesity, and raising tax revenue.

Recommendations

Based on the evidence, I recommend supporting a high soda tax rather than a soda ban—though neither soda tax nor a soda ban can be causally linked to obesity prevention. I believe that the demand for soda, like potato chips and cigarettes, is relatively inelastic and that a small change in price in the form of a tax would be effective in raising revenue, but may not be effective in reducing consumption of SSBs. Therefore, a tax would have to be high enough to truly change behavior, like the tax on cigarettes. Soda taxes have the added benefit of raising revenue for the city that could be used to conduct further research into what motivates people to lose weight and get healthy. More evidence about which foods people eat in excess or are the least healthy or highest in calories may help create future policies to fight obesity.

What do you think? Are soda taxes or soda bans the answer to the obesity epidemic or the financial crisis facing many districts? What would you recommend? Are there alternative policy solutions to fight obesity? Let me know in the comments!

To read more, check out my related posts:

Part One: Will a ban on soda really reduce obesity?
Part Two: Soda Taxes vs Soda Bans… What’s the Difference?
Part Three: Case studies in soda ban and soda tax effectiveness: El Monte and New York City