“Farcical to Suggest” That Proposed Sugar Tax in UK Will Have Positive Impact on Diet, Says Taxpayers’ Alliance

31 May 2016 --- The proposed sugar tax in the UK will "hit poorest families hardest" and it is "farcical to suggest” it will have any positive impact on people's diet or lifestyle choices, according to the Taxpayer' Alliance.

The Taxpayers' Alliance, which campaigns for lower taxes, has called for the tax, which was announced in the Budget in March this year, to be scrapped and has carried out research which it argues shows it has nothing to do with the sugar content of products.

The proposed tax, which is aimed at reducing obesity levels, has been broadly welcomed by health campaigners but has been rejected by the drinks industry, which believes it has been unfairly singled out by the proposed levy.

In its research, the Taxpayers’ Alliance found that some drinks sold in coffee chains had more sugar than, for example, Coca-Cola, but would not face the tax.

Examples in the research include:
Coca-Cola (10.6 grams of sugar per 100 millilitres) will be subjected to Sugar Tax. But a Starbucks’ Signature Hot Chocolate with Whipped Cream with Coconut milk (11 grams of sugar per 100 millilitres) will not.

Energy drinks such as Monster Origin (11g/100ml) will be taxed, but Tesco Chocolate Flavoured Milk (12.4g/100ml) will not.

Jonathan Isaby, Chief Executive of the Taxpayers’ Alliance, said:" It is deeply concerning that the Government has given in to the pressures from the public health lobby and is pushing ahead with this regressive tax which will hit the poorest families hardest. “

“The evidence shows that the Sugar Tax has nothing to do with the sugar content of products, so it is farcical to suggest that this will have any positive impact on people's diet or lifestyle choices."

However the Treasury responding by saying: “The soft drinks industry levy is a major step forward in our efforts to tackle childhood obesity; treating obesity and its consequences costs the taxpayer £5.1bn every year. “

“The levy will be charged on soft drinks because they are the main source of added sugar in children's and teenagers' diets, many with no intrinsic nutritional value.”

The sugar tax, which aims to raise £520m (US$746 million) in the first year, will come into force into two years, so fizzy drinks manufactures will have time to cut sugar levels if they want to avoid the tax.

The money raised will fund sport in schools for children, the government said.

It follows campaigning from the health campaigners including celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, who believe the tax will help reduce childhood obesity.

The tax is being levied in two bands - one for total sugar content above 5 grams per 100ml and a second band for most sugary drinks with more than 8 grams per 100ml.

Sugar content in drinks as well as food continues to be a major health, as well as political, issue.

Earlier this month, the body which sets rules for UK advertising said it is considering a complete ban on advertising unhealthy foods to children to help reduce obesity.

The plan to restrict the promotion of foods high in fat, salt and sugar to under 16s is being consulted on by the Committee of Advertising Practice.

It would see the existing ban on TV ads extended to all media, including online outlets, the regulator said.