Fat Tax? Fat Chance!

Categories: Uncategorized
Fat Tax? Fat Chance!

New Yorkers collectively groaned in outrage when the proposed ‘fat tax’ got closer to passing with the help of a survey of health care experts. But is it really such a great plan? And are the experts really experts?

The argument behind the ‘fat tax’ is pretty simple: people who drink non-diet soda (for example) weigh more, are less healthy, and thus end up costing more taxpayer money in medical expenses and lost tax revenue. Simple dollars and cents — and yet common sense seems to be absent from the debate.

Why not look into what actually happens when you substitute diet drinks for the regular kind? The results aren’t pretty: if one study is any guide, New Yorkers choosing diet drinks face an elevated risk of cancer — or worse, weight gain. That’s right: when your body realizes that the sugar-taste doesn’t mean you’re getting any sugar, it gets confused, and tries to stock up on more fat to be on the safe side.

Oddly enough, many of these laws have the same effect on human behavior. The mortgage-interest tax deduction was supposed to make houses cheap, but everyone realized that this would make people want to buy houses, which made other people want to buy those houses first, which ended up making housing unsustainably expensive.

Overreacting to easy shortcuts is something healthy people — and healthy economies — naturally do. If the average New Yorker is going to lose weight, it’s going to be harder than picking diet over regular; and if the state wants New Yorkers to lose weight, it’s going to have to do better than paying them to try it the easy way.

And finally, it’s important to ask just who is claiming that this is a good idea. The press release suggests that the “Healthcare Education Project” consists of “New York?s healthcare workers and providers” — and that’s true. But it doesn’t represent healthcare workers and providers in the sense that it gives their best diagnosis: it’s a lobbying organization designed to give them maximum funding and clout. You can be assured that whatever the effect of this law, they’ll be there to take the credit (“Healthcare Education Project helped New Yorkers lose weight in 2009!”) or shirk the blame (“New Yorkers’ weight gain in 2009 proves that the Healthcare Education Project is essential.”)

Nobody works hard so their taxes can be spent on badly-executive bad ideas pushed by thinly-disguised interest groups.

Share

4 Responses to “Fat Tax? Fat Chance!”

  1. Big Danger for Soda Lovers Says:

    [...] “fat tax” has been discussed for years, but only now has it become a political possibility. Now that [...]

  2. Mar Matthias Darin Says:

    What I’ve noticed most is the lack of mentioning those that suffer weight issues not from eating but from medical issues like thyroid disorders, cancer, and so on.

    The second issue that I can see is the possibility of discrimination followed by a whopper law suit. Calling it a “fat tax” is an open invitation for a suit.

    It would be better to refer to these items as a “sweets tax” or “luxury foods tax” which is also more applicable to the intent.

  3. Fat Tax, Redux | Tax Rascal Says:

    [...] fat tax proposal is back, and it hasn’t exactly slimmed down. Now, instead of a statewide tax hike, [...]

  4. Austin Kobs Says:

    I say that at the very least we implement a program for a short-period of time so that we can study the financial effects of such a tax on teh actually purchase of said items. If we don’t try it, how can we reasonably say that it has no merit and will not work? There is not enough research on the matter because such a tax has never before been effecitvely implemented….

Leave a Reply

Advertisement

Featured & Popular Articles