Promoting Healthier Purchases: Ultraprocessed Food Taxes and Minimally Processed Foods Subsidies for the Low Income.

Fiscal policies can shift relative food prices to encourage the purchase and consumption of minimally processed foods while discouraging the purchase and consumption of unhealthy ultraprocessed foods, high in calories and nutrients of concern (sodium, sugar, and saturated fats), especially for low-income households. The 2017-2018 packaged food purchase data among U.S. households were used to derive household income- and composition-specific demand elasticities across 22 food and beverage categories. Policy simulations, conducted in 2022-2023, assessed the impact of national taxes on unhealthy ultraprocessed food and beverage purchases, both separately and alongside subsidies for minimally processed foods and beverages targeted to low-income households. Resultant nutritional implications are reported on the basis of changes in purchased calories and nutrients of concern. In addition, financial implications for both households and the federal government are projected. A sugar-based tax on sugar-sweetened beverages would lower both volume and calories purchased with the largest impact on low-income households without children. Meanwhile, targeted subsidies would increase fruit, vegetable, and healthier drink purchases without substantially increasing calories. Under tax simulations, low-income households would make larger reductions in their absolute volume and calorie purchases of taxed foods and beverages than their higher-income counterparts, suggesting that these policies, if implemented, could help narrow nutritional disparities. Levying national taxes on unhealthy ultraprocessed foods/beverages and offering targeted subsidies for minimally processed foods/beverages could promote healthier food choices among low-income households. Such policies have the potential to benefit low-income households financially and at a relatively low cost for the federal government annually.

Valizadeh P ，Ng SW 《-》

Linking a sugar-sweetened beverage tax with fruit and vegetable subsidies: A simulation analysis of the impact on the poor.

US individuals, particularly from low-income subpopulations, have very poor diet quality. Policies encouraging shifts from consuming unhealthy food towards healthy food consumption are needed. We simulate the differential impacts of a national sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax and combinations of SSB taxes with fruit and vegetable (FV) subsidies targeted to low-income households on SSB and FV purchases of lower and higher SSB purchasers. We considered a 1-cent-per-ounce SSB tax and 2 FV subsidy rates of 30% and 50% and used longitudinal grocery purchase data for 79,044 urban/semiurban US households from 2010-2014 Nielsen Homescan data. We used demand elasticities for lower and higher SSB purchasers, estimated via longitudinal quantile regression, to simulate policies' differential effects. Higher-SSB-purchasing households made larger reductions (per adult equivalent) in SSB purchases than lower SSB purchasers due to the tax (e.g., 4.4 oz/day at SSB purchase percentile 90 compared with 0.5 oz/day at percentile 25; P < 0.05). Our analyses by household income indicated low-income households would make larger reductions than higher-income households at all SSB purchase levels. Targeted FV subsidies induced similar, but nutritionally insignificant, increases in FV purchases of low-income households, regardless of their SSB purchase levels. Subsidies, however, were effective in mitigating the tax burdens. All low-income households experienced a net financial gain when the tax was combined with a 50% FV subsidy, but net gains were smaller among higher SSB purchasers. Further, low-income households with children gained smaller net financial benefits than households without children and incurred net financial losses under a 30% subsidy rate. SSB taxes can effectively reduce SSB consumption. FV subsidies would increase FV purchases, but nutritionally meaningful increases are limited due to low purchase levels before policy implementation. Expanding taxes beyond SSBs, providing larger FV subsidies, or offering subsidies beyond FVs, particularly for low-income households with children, may be more effective.

Valizadeh P ，Popkin BM ，Ng SW 《-》

Association of a Sweetened Beverage Tax With Purchases of Beverages and High-Sugar Foods at Independent Stores in Philadelphia.

Bleich SN ，Dunn CG ，Soto MJ ，Yan J ，Gibson LA ，Lawman HG ，Mitra N ，Lowery CM ，Peterhans A ，Hua SV ，Roberto CA ... -  《JAMA Network Open》

An evaluation of Chile's Law of Food Labeling and Advertising on sugar-sweetened beverage purchases from 2015 to 2017: A before-and-after study.

Taillie LS ，Reyes M ，Colchero MA ，Popkin B ，Corvalán C ... -  《-》

The caloric and sugar content of beverages purchased at different store-types changed after the sugary drinks taxation in Mexico.

Pedraza LS ，Popkin BM ，Batis C ，Adair L ，Robinson WR ，Guilkey DK ，Taillie LS ... -  《International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity》