HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

Electronic Letters to:

Evidence based public health policy and practice: Oliver Mytton, Alastair Gray, Mike Rayner, and Harry Rutter Could targeted food taxes improve health? J Epidemiol Community Health 2007; 61: 689-694 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]

eLetters: Submit a response to this article

Electronic letters published:

The best recipe? Combining food taxes with subsidies on healthy foods

Nick Wilson, Osman Mansoor   (28 August 2007)

The best recipe? Combining food taxes with subsidies on healthy foods 28 August 2007
Nick Wilson, Senior Lecturer (Public Health) Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, Osman Mansoor Send letter to journal: Re: The best recipe? Combining food taxes with subsidies on healthy foods nick.wilson{at}otago.ac.nz Nick Wilson, et al.	Dear Editor The Journal has previously explored interesting taxation and health issues [1,2] and the recent paper by Mytton et al [3] on food taxes is no exception. This new work nicely demonstrates the complexities, uncertainties and potential benefit of taxing certain foods as an instrument to reduce the high burden of chronic diseases. The key issues raised are which foods get substituted as a result of decreased consumption of the more expensive foods, and the regressive nature of the taxes. However, a simple policy option that can easily address both issues is the provision of subsidised “healthy foods” (eg, fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and legumes) to low-income groups. The subsidies could be financed from taxes on the “unhealthy foods” so that the net effect is fiscally neutral to the tax-payer. Electronic cards provided to low-income groups could allow for discounts on these foods in a manner that maximises anonymity for the users and minimises risks of any embarrassment. Specific taxes on such components as salt and sugar might also assist in maximising a health-promoting food pricing strategy. Actual regulatory limits on salt, sugar and saturated fat in processed foods may be a backup option, if taxes on these were not as effective as anticipated. “Healthy food” producers may support some of these moves and prove to be allies with health agencies and government in introducing these changes. However, some industry losers will be likely to object strongly and potentially use the ruthless survival tactics of the tobacco industry, the asbestos industry, and the leaded petrol industry etc. A particularly promising alliance for health workers is however, the environmental movement with its concern over greenhouse gas emissions. That is a methane tax on livestock may act as a proxy tax on saturated fat by raising the price of ruminant meat and dairy products. Methane charges on the agricultural sector are currently being explored in at least one country (New Zealand) as part of a comprehensive approach to greenhouse gas control. Such taxes promise to deliver both environmental and public health nutrition benefits and as such should also be a priority for future policy development. Nick Wilson Senior Lecturer, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand Osman Mansoor Public health physician, Wellington, New Zealand Competing interests: None. References 1 Selmer RM, Kristiansen IS, Haglerod A, et al. Cost and health consequences of reducing the population intake of salt. J Epidemiol Community Health 2000;54:697-702. 2 Wilson N, Thomson G, Tobias M, Blakely T. How much downside? Quantifying the relative harm from tobacco taxation. J Epidemiol Community Health 2004;58:451-4. 3 Oliver Mytton, Alastair Gray, Mike Rayner and Harry Rutter. Could targeted food taxes improve health? J Epidemiol Community Health 2007;61;689-694.