IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwrup/103de.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Eine Softdrinksteuer zur fiskalischen Konsumsteuerung

Author

Listed:
  • Renke Schmacker

Abstract

Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) einen Bericht vorgestellt, in dem sie eine 20%-ige Steuer auf zuckergesüßte Getränke empfiehlt (WHO 2016). Zuletzt hat Großbritannien die Einführung einer solchen Abgabe im Haushalt 2016 beschlossen und erwartet, nebst Einnahmen von 520 Millionen Pfund im ersten Jahr, einen deutlichen Rückgang des Übergewichts (HM Treasury 2016). Ob eine solche fiskalische Konsumsteuerung tatsächlich zu einer gesünderen Ernährung führt, hängt von mehreren Faktoren ab: Wie stark reagiert die Nachfrage nach Softdrinks auf eine Preisänderung? Wie wirkt sich die Steuer auf die Nachfrage nach anderen gesunden oder ungesunden Gütern aus? Wird die Steuerlast stärker von Produzenten oder Konsumenten getragen? Dieser Text fasst den aktuellen Forschungsstand im Hinblick auf diese und weitere Fragen zusammen.

Suggested Citation

  • Renke Schmacker, 2016. "Eine Softdrinksteuer zur fiskalischen Konsumsteuerung," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 103, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwrup:103de
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.546337.de/DIW_Roundup_103_de.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreyeva, T. & Long, M.W. & Brownell, K.D., 2010. "The impact of food prices on consumption: A systematic review of research on the price elasticity of demand for food," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(2), pages 216-222.
    2. Fletcher, Jason M. & Frisvold, David E. & Tefft, Nathan, 2010. "The effects of soft drink taxes on child and adolescent consumption and weight outcomes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 967-974, December.
    3. Laurent Muller & Anne Lacroix & Jayson L. Lusk & Bernard Ruffieux, 2017. "Distributional Impacts of Fat Taxes and Thin Subsidies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(604), pages 2066-2092, September.
    4. Finkelstein, Eric A. & Zhen, Chen & Bilger, Marcel & Nonnemaker, James & Farooqui, Assad M. & Todd, Jessica E., 2013. "Implications of a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax when substitutions to non-beverage items are considered," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 219-239.
    5. Falbe, J. & Thompson, H.R. & Becker, C.M. & Rojas, N. & McCulloch, C.E. & Madsen, K.A., 2016. "Impact of the Berkeley excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverage consumption," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 106(10), pages 1865-1871.
    6. Bonnet, Céline & Réquillart, Vincent, 2013. "Tax incidence with strategic firms in the soft drink market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 77-88.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jakina Debnam, 2017. "Selection Effects and Heterogeneous Demand Responses to the Berkeley Soda Tax Vote," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1172-1187.
    2. Daniel John Zizzo & Melanie Parravano & Ryota Nakamura & Suzanna Forwood & Marc Suhrcke, 2021. "The impact of taxation and signposting on diet: an online field study with breakfast cereals and soft drinks," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1294-1324, December.
    3. Fabrice Etilé, 2019. "The Economics of Diet and Obesity: Public Policy," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-02154445, HAL.
    4. Sunjin Ahn & Jayson L. Lusk, 2021. "Non‐Pecuniary Effects of Sugar‐Sweetened Beverage Policies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 53-69, January.
    5. Nicoletta Berardi & Patrick Sevestre & Marine Tépaut & Alexandre Vigneron, 2016. "The impact of a ‘soda tax’ on prices: evidence from French micro data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(41), pages 3976-3994, September.
    6. Allais, Olivier & Etilé, Fabrice & Lecocq, Sébastien, 2015. "Mandatory labels, taxes and market forces: An empirical evaluation of fat policies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 27-44.
    7. Alberto Gago & Xavier Labandeira & Xiral López Otero, 2014. "A Panorama on Energy Taxes and Green Tax Reforms," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 208(1), pages 145-190, March.
    8. Haeck, Catherine & Lawson, Nicholas & Poirier, Krystel, 2022. "Estimating consumer preferences for different beverages using the BLP approach," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    9. Härkänen, Tommi & Kotakorpi, Kaisa & Pietinen, Pirjo & Pirttilä, Jukka & Reinivuo, Heli & Suoniemi, Ilpo, 2014. "The welfare effects of health-based food tax policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 196-206.
    10. Harding, Matthew & Lovenheim, Michael, 2017. "The effect of prices on nutrition: Comparing the impact of product- and nutrient-specific taxes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 53-71.
    11. Taylor, Rebecca & Kaplan, Scott & Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Jung, Kevin, 2016. "Soda Wars: Effect of a Soda Tax Election on Soda Purchases," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0q18s7b7, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    12. Xiang, Di & Zhan, Lue & Bordignon, Massimo, 2020. "A reconsideration of the sugar sweetened beverage tax in a household production model," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    13. Massimo Bordignon & Di Xiang & Lue Zhan, 2018. "Predicting the Effects of a Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax in a Household Production Model," DISCE - Working Papers del Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza def075, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    14. Alberto Pench, 0. "Time Allocation and Snacks and Sugar Sweetened Beverages Taxation," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    15. Fabrice Etilé & Sébastien Lecocq & Christine Boizot-Szantai, 2021. "Market heterogeneity and the distributional incidence of soft-drink taxes: evidence from France [Regressive sin taxes, with an application to the optimal soda tax]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 48(4), pages 915-939.
    16. Alberto Pench, 2020. "Time Allocation and Snacks and Sugar Sweetened Beverages Taxation," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 6(3), pages 469-492, November.
    17. Aguilar, Arturo & Gutierrez, Emilio & Seira, Enrique, 2021. "The effectiveness of sin food taxes: Evidence from Mexico," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    18. Powell, Lisa M. & Jones, Kelly & Duran, Ana Clara & Tarlov, Elizabeth & Zenk, Shannon N., 2019. "The price of ultra-processed foods and beverages and adult body weight: Evidence from U.S. veterans," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 39-48.
    19. Joan Gil & Guillem López Casasnovas & Toni Mora, 2013. "Taxation of unhealthy consumption of food and drinks: An updated literature review," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 207(4), pages 119-140, December.
    20. Pourya Valizadeh & Shu Wen Ng, 2021. "Would A National Sugar‐Sweetened Beverage Tax in the United States Be Well Targeted?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 961-986, May.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwrup:103de. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.