scholarly journals Distribution of sugar-sweetened beverage sales volume by sugar content in the United States: implications for tiered taxation and tax revenue

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M. Powell ◽  
Tatiana Andreyeva ◽  
Zeynep Isgor
2021 ◽  
pp. 101388
Author(s):  
James Krieger ◽  
Kiran Magee ◽  
Tayler Hennings ◽  
John Schoof ◽  
Kristine A. Madsen

2020 ◽  
Vol 120 (12) ◽  
pp. 1974-1985.e5
Author(s):  
Kelsey A. Vercammen ◽  
Alyssa J. Moran ◽  
Mark J. Soto ◽  
Lee Kennedy-Shaffer ◽  
Sara N. Bleich

Sleep Health ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 272-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aric A. Prather ◽  
Cindy W. Leung ◽  
Nancy E. Adler ◽  
Lorrene Ritchie ◽  
Barbara Laraia ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (6) ◽  
pp. 523-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yujin Lee ◽  
Dariush Mozaffarian ◽  
Stephen Sy ◽  
Junxiu Liu ◽  
Parke E. Wilde ◽  
...  

Background: Sugar-sweetened beverage taxes are a rapidly growing policy tool and can be based on absolute volume, sugar content tiers, or absolute sugar content. Yet, their comparative health and economic impacts have not been quantified, in particular, tiered or sugar content taxes that provide industry incentives for sugar reduction. Methods: We estimated incremental changes in diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease, quality-adjusted life-years, costs, and cost-effectiveness of 3 sugar-sweetened beverage tax designs in the United States, on the basis of (1) volume ($0.01/oz), (2) tiers (<5 g of added sugar/8 oz: no tax; 5–20 g/8 oz: $0.01/oz; and >20 g/8 oz: $0.02/oz), and (3) absolute sugar content ($0.01 per teaspoon added sugar), each compared with a base case of modest ongoing voluntary industry reformulation. A validated microsimulation model, CVD-PREDICT (Cardiovascular Disease Policy Model for Risk, Events, Detection, Interventions, Costs, and Trends), incorporated national demographic and dietary data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, policy effects and sugar-sweetened beverage-related diseases from meta-analyses, and industry reformulation and health-related costs from established sources. Results: Over a lifetime, the volume, tiered, and absolute sugar content taxes would generate $80.4 billion, $142 billion, and $41.7 billion in tax revenue, respectively. From a healthcare perspective, the volume tax would prevent 850 000 cardiovascular disease (95% CI, 836 000–864 000) and 269 000 diabetes mellitus (265 000–274 000) cases, gain 2.44 million quality-adjusted life-years (2.40–2.48), and save $53.2 billion net costs (52.3–54.1). Health gains and savings were approximately doubled for the tiered and absolute sugar content taxes. Results were robust for societal and government perspectives, at 10 years follow-up, and with lower (50%) tax pass-through. Health gains were largest in young adults, blacks and Hispanics, and lower-income Americans. Conclusions: All sugar-sweetened beverage tax designs would generate substantial health gains and savings. Tiered and absolute sugar content taxes should be considered and evaluated for maximal potential gains.


2013 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 180-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian K Kit ◽  
Tala HI Fakhouri ◽  
Sohyun Park ◽  
Samara Joy Nielsen ◽  
Cynthia L Ogden

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mengxi Du ◽  
Christina F Griecci ◽  
David D Kim ◽  
Frederick Cudhea ◽  
Mengyuan Ruan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption contributes to obesity, a risk factor for 13 cancers. Although SSB taxes can reduce intake, the health and economic impact on reducing cancer burdens in the United States are unknown, especially among low-income Americans with higher SSB intake and obesity-related cancer burdens. Methods We used the Diet and Cancer Outcome Model, a probabilistic cohort state-transition model, to project health gains and economic benefits of a penny-per-ounce national SSB tax on reducing obesity-associated cancers among US adults aged 20 years and older by income. Results A national SSB tax was estimated to prevent 22 075 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] = 16 040-28 577) new cancer cases and 13 524 (95% UI = 9841-17 681) cancer deaths among US adults over a lifetime. The policy was estimated to cost $1.70 (95% UI = $1.50-$1.95) billion for government implementation and $1.70 (95% UI = $1.48-$1.96) billion for industry compliance, while saving $2.28 (95% UI = $1.67-$2.98) billion cancer-related healthcare costs. The SSB tax was highly cost-effective from both a government affordability perspective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] = $1486, 95% UI = -$3516-$9265 per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) and a societal perspective (ICER = $13 220, 95% UI = $3453-$28 120 per QALY). Approximately 4800 more cancer cases and 3100 more cancer deaths would be prevented, and $0.34 billion more healthcare cost savings would be generated among low-income (federal poverty-to-income ratio [FPIR] ≤ 1.85) than higher-income individuals (FPIR &gt; 1.85). Conclusions A penny-per-ounce national SSB tax is cost-effective for cancer prevention in the United States, with the largest health gains and economic benefits among low-income Americans.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document