Reports | Research Briefs | Policy Briefs | Policy Profiles | Fact Sheets | Peer Reviews | Industry Watch | Archives
FEATURED PUBLICATION
A new study from University of Washington, led by HFA Executive Director Jim Krieger and University of Washington Associate Professor Jesse Jones-Smith is the first to use real-world tax data to describe the economic equity aspects of sweetened beverage taxes (SBTs). The study looked at taxes paid and benefits received from programs supported with tax revenues by people with lower and higher incomes in three cities with taxes. Not surprisingly, it found that people with lower incomes paid a larger proportion of their household income on SBTs compared to those with higher incomes, although the proportion of their incomes were quite small, ranging from 0.06% to 0.5% across the three cities. The annual per person dollar amount paid in taxes was also small ($5.50- $31) and did not differ by income level. Notably, the study found the net tax effect was to redistribute dollars from higher to lower income households. The dollar amount of tax revenues funding programs targeted towards people with lower incomes is greater than the amount they pay in taxes. This suggests a SBT is a progressive, equitable public policy when tax revenues are intentionally invested in communities with lower incomes.
You can read the study here, and learn more about equity in sweetened beverage tax policy on our webpage.
Key Findings
- Lower income populations paid a higher percentage of their income in beverage taxes relative to higher income populations, although the percentage was small: (0.06% - 0.5% vs. 0.01 - 0.06%).
- There was no difference in the dollar amount of taxes paid per person per year by lower income and higher income households, which ranged from $5.50 to $31 across cities and income groups.
- The investment of tax revenues in lower income communities was greater than the amount these communities paid in taxes. The opposite was true for higher income communities.
- The annual net benefit to lower income communities ranged from $5.3 million to $16.4 million across the three U.S. cities included in the study.
- Jones-Smith JC, Knox MA, Coe NB, Walkinshaw LP, Schoof J, Hamilton D, Hurvitz PM, Krieger J. Sweetened beverage taxes: Economic benefits and costs according to household income. Food Policy. 2022;110: Article 102277. doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102277.
- Falbe J, Grummon AH, Krieger JW. Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes and Population Health Outcomes. JAMA Pediatr. 2022 Feb 1;176(2):129-131. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.5051. Leng KH, Yaroch AL, Nugent NB, Stotz SA, Krieger J. How Does the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program Work? A Theory of Change. Nutrients. 2022 May 11;14(10):2018. doi: 10.3390/nu14102018.
- Krieger J, Kwon T, Ruiz R, Walkinshaw LP, Yan J, Roberto CA. Countermarketing About Fruit Drinks, Alone or With Water Promotion: A 2019 Randomized Controlled Trial in Latinx Parents. Am J Public Health. 2021 Nov;111(11):1997-2007. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2021.306488.
- Krieger J, Bleich SN, Scarmo S, Ng SW. Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Reduction Policies: Progress and Promise. Annu Rev Public Health. 2021 Apr 1;42:439-461. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-090419-103005.
2020
- Krieger J, Magee K, Hennings T, Schoof J, Madsen K. How sugar-sweetened beverage tax revenues are being used in the United States. Preventive Medicine Reports. 2021:101388. doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101388.
- Grummon AH, Roberto CA, Krieger JW. Is the Association Between Beverage Taxes and Reductions in Sales Driven by Communication of Health Consequences in Addition to Price Increases? JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(12):e2032537. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.32537.
- Dibay Moghadam S, Krieger JW, Louden DKN. A systematic review of the effectiveness of promoting water intake to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. Obes Sci Pract. 2020 Mar 29;6(3):229-246. doi: 10.1002/osp4.397.
2019
- Madsen KA, Krieger J, Morales X. Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes: Emerging Evidence on a New Public Health Policy. JAMA. 2019 May 14;321(18):1777-1779.
2018
- Jacobson MF, Krieger J, Brownell KD. Potential Policy Approaches to Address Diet-Related Diseases. JAMA. Published online June 28, 2018. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.7434
- Auerbach BJ, Littman AJ, Krieger J, Young BA, Larson J, Tinker L, Neuhouser ML. Association of 100% fruit juice consumption and 3-year weight change among postmenopausal women in the in the Women's Health Initiative. Prev Med. 2018 Apr;109:8-10
- Auerbach BJ, Dibey S, Vallila-Buchman P, Kratz M, Krieger J. Review of 100% Fruit Juice and Chronic Health Conditions: Implications for Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Policy. Advances in Nutrition, 2018; 9(2):78–85.
2017
- Auerbach BJ, Littman AJ, Tinker L, Larson J, Krieger J, Young B, Neuhouser M. Associations of 100% fruit juice versus whole fruit with hypertension and diabetes risk in postmenopausal women: Results from the Women's Health Initiative. Prev Med. 2017 Sep 6. pii: S0091-7435(17)30315-8.
- Auerbach B. Wolf FM, Hikida A, Vallila-Buchman P, Littman A, Thompson D, Louden D, Taber DR, Krieger JW. Fruit Juice and Change in Body Mass Index – A Meta-Analysis. Pediatrics, published online: 2017 March 21. (doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-1536).
