Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

The public health impacts of a fat tax

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume 65, pages 427–433 (2011)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background/Objectives:

Previous studies have analysed impacts on average intakes. Agueably however intakes that are of real concern are those which are some distance away from the recommendations. Fiscal measures might have a limited impact on such diets, and as a result, on health. We measure the impact of a fiscal intervention on the the risks of diet-related disease, accounting for the full range of diets.

Subjects/Methods:

Demand equations are estimated with data collected from 6760 households in the UK Expenditure and Food Survey. The model is used to simulate the impacts of a policy, in which a tax based on saturated fat content is combined with subsidy on fruit and vegetables. Changes in consumption are used to compute the effects on the risks of a range of diet-related disease using measures of relative risk. In contrast with other studies, we simulate the impacts of the fiscal regime at the level of the individual households in the sample.

Results:

The subsidy brings mean levels of fruit and vegetable consumption in line with dietary recommendations, but the tax is insufficient to achieve this goal for fat intakes. Once the changes in diet are converted into changes in the risks of disease, the impacts of the policy are negligible. A substantial part of the population continues to consume an unhealthy diet.

Conclusion:

Fiscally based interventions should be considered amongst a suite of policy interventions, which also include policies aimed at improving the poorest of diets.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andreyeva T, Long MW, Brownell KD (2010). The impact of food prices on consumption: a systematic review of research on the price elasticity of demand for food. Am J of Public Health 100, 216–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnoult M, Tiffin R, Traill W (2008). Models of Nutrient Demand, Tax Policy and Public Health Impact Research Report. University of Reading, Reading, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beecham L (2003). Doctors vote against a tax on fatty food. Br Med J 327, 72–7l (http://www.bmj.com).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blundell R, Meghir C (1987). Bivariate alternatives to the tobit-model. J Econometrics 34, 179–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brownell K, Frieden T (2009). Ounces of prevention - the public policy case for taxes on sugared beverages. N Engl J Med 360: 1599–1605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chouinard H, Davis D, LaFrance J, Perloff J (2005). The effects of a fat tax on dairy products. CUDARE Working Paper 1007, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley, USA.

  • Deaton A, Muellbauer J (1980). An almost ideal demand system. Amer Econ Rev 70, 312–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • DoH (1991). Dietary Reference Values for Food Energy and Nutrients in the UK. Report on Health and Social Subjects 41, Department of Health, London, UK.

  • Edgerton D (1997). Weak seperability and the estimation of elasticities in multistage demand systems. Amer J Agr Econ 79, 62–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esrey K, Joseph L, Grover S (1996). Relationships between dietary intake and coronary heart disease mortality. J Clin Epidemiol 49, 211–216.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Food Standards Agency (2007). Low Income Diet and Nutrition Survey. The Stationary Office, London, UK.

  • Gentile D, Walk G, Eisenmann J, Reimer R, Walsh D, Russell D et al. (2009). Evaluation of a multiple ecological level child obesity prevention program: switch what you do, view and chew. BMC Med 7.

  • Hung HC, Joshipura KJ, Jiang R, Hu FB, Hunter D, Smith-Warner SA, Colditz GA et al. (2004). Fruit and vegetable intake and risk of major chronic disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 96, 1577–1584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen J, Smed S (2007). Cost-effective design of economic instruments in nutrition policy. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 4.

  • Joshipura K, Hu F, Manson J, Stampfer M, Speizer ERF, Colditz G et al. (2001). The effect of fruit and vegetable intake on risk for coronary heart disease. Ann Intern Med 134, 1106–1114.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy E, Offutt S (2000). Alternative nutrition outcome using a fiscal food policy. Commentary tomarshall (2000). Br Med J 320, 304–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuchler F, Tegene A, Harris J (2005). Taxing snack foods: manipulating diet quality or financing information programs? Rev Agr Econ 27, 4–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy D, Hyland A, Higbee C, Remer L, Compton C (2007). The role of public policies in reducing smoking prevalence in California: results from the California tobacco policy simulation model. Health Policy 82, 167–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall T (2000). Exploring a fiscal food policy: the case of diet and ischaemic heart disease. Br Med J 320, 301–304.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mytton O, Gray A, Rayner M, Rutter H (2007). Could targeted food taxes improve health? J Epidemiol Community Health 61, 689–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NFS (2000). National food survey. Date accessed 13/07/2010. (http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/food/familyfood/nationalfoodsurvey/documents/NFS2000.pdf).

  • Nnoaham K, Sacks G, Rayner M, Mytton O, Gray A (2009). Modelling income group differences in the health and economic impacts of targeted food taxes and subsidies. Int J Epidemiol 38, 1324–1333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riboli E, Norat T (2003). Epidemiologic evidence of the protective effect of fruit and vegetables on cancer risk. Am J Clin Nutr 78, 559S–569S.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stokols D, Allen J, Bellingham R (1996). The social ecology of health promotion: implications for research and practice. Am J Health Promot 10, 247–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tiffin R, Arnoult M (2010). The demand for a healthy diet: estimating the almost ideal demand system with infrequency of purchase. Eur Rev Agric Econ 37, 501–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work reported in the paper was funded by the ESRC under the Rural Economy and Land Use programme.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural and Food Economics, University of Reading, Reading, UK

    R Tiffin

  2. Land Economy and Environment Research Group, Scottish Agricultural College, Edinburgh, UK

    M Arnoult

Authors
  1. R Tiffin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M Arnoult
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R Tiffin.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tiffin, R., Arnoult, M. The public health impacts of a fat tax. Eur J Clin Nutr 65, 427–433 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2010.281

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2010.281

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links