Soda tax in the US Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Soda tax in the US - Essay idealStatistics show that more(prenominal) than nonpareil third or 35.7% of adults in the US are obese and suffer from obesity-related conditions such as diabetes and coronary diseases. Obesity preponderance varies across different states whereby, in 2002, all states had a prevalence of more than 20% with the prevalence ranging from 34.7% in Louisiana to 20.5% in Colorado. Furthermore, the federals yearly medical expense of obesity as of 2008 was $ 147 cardinal dollars (CDC, 2013). Prompted by the rise in obesity in the coarse, different researchers have hypothesizes different causes and suggested solutions aimed at mitigating the bad social and economic effects of obesity. The soda tax is one such suggestion however, not all agree on the possible benefits likely to end point from the taxation of soft drinks. Whether or not adopting the soda tax in the US proves sufficient in reducing the obesity valuate in the country remains a controversial issue for those for and against the tax policy. Proponents for the tax base their argument on credible research findings, which indicate that taxing soft drinks reduces spunky caloric intake minimizing an individuals probability of developing obesity. First introduced as an abstract idea by the Director of Rudd Center for food for thought Policy and Obesity (RCFPO) Kelly D. Brownell in 1994, the soda tax aimed to improve public health while simultaneously raise revenue in the US economy. afterward studies done in Yale University by the RCFPO in 2011 indicated that a penny-per-ounce levy on soft drinks would function to reduce consumption by 13%, which resulted in the ejection of 8,000 calories from a regular, Americans diet annually.... inancial implication of obesity as a reason for taxing soft drinks, which many researchers have hypothesized as one of the leading causes of obesity in the US. Revenue generated from taxing soft drinks proves beneficial for the federal and state govern ments whereby, governmental officials can use the funds to offset monetary deficits in the budget. A survey done by the U.S Department of Health and Human Services in 2012 indicated that taxing soft drinks would generate revenue of $ 14.9 billion dollars within the first fiscal year alone (Fletcher et al, 2010). Conversely, those against the tax policy sight poor lifestyle habits such as living a sedentary life and poor nutrition (high cholesterol diet) as major causes of obesity, which if not addressed would render taxing soft drinks inefficient in minimizing the obesity rate within the country. Research done by Fletcher and colleagues in 2009 aimed at examining the impact of fluctuating soda tax in different states on body tidy sum index (BMI) revealed that soft drinks consumption accounted for 7% of total energy intake. They concluded that if taxed at the average taxation rate of tobacco (58%) the mean BMI of the US commonwealth would only pass by 0.16 points reducing obesity in the population by 0.7% (Fletcher et al, 2010). This showed that soft drink taxes influence on BMI is minimal and does little to decrease obesity in the population. Furthermore, those against this policy are of the opinion that taxation of soft drinks does not limit their accessibility because many are willing to spend more money for their preferred luxury items such as soft drinks. In conclusion, it is apparent that both the public and the government stand to benefit from the soda tax. onerous soft drinks generates revenue for the government,