Brian Elbel1, Glen B Taksler2, Tod Mijanovich3, Courtney B Abrams2, L B Dixon4. 1. Departments of Population Health and Medicine, School of Medicine, New York University, New York, New York. Electronic address: brian.elbel@nyumc.org. 2. Departments of Population Health and Medicine, School of Medicine, New York University, New York, New York. 3. Steinhardt School, New York University, New York, New York. 4. Wagner School of Public Service, New York University, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To induce consumers to purchase healthier foods and beverages, some policymakers have suggested special taxes or labels on unhealthy products. The potential of such policies is unknown. PURPOSE: In a controlled field experiment, researchers tested whether consumers were more likely to purchase healthy products under such policies. METHODS: From October to December 2011, researchers opened a store at a large hospital that sold a variety of healthier and less-healthy foods and beverages. Purchases (N=3680) were analyzed under five conditions: a baseline with no special labeling or taxation, a 30% tax, highlighting the phrase "less healthy" on the price tag, and combinations of taxation and labeling. Purchases were analyzed in January-July 2012, at the single-item and transaction levels. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the various taxation conditions. Consumers were 11 percentage points more likely to purchase a healthier item under a 30% tax (95% CI=7%, 16%, p<0.001) and 6 percentage points more likely under labeling (95% CI=0%, 12%, p=0.04). By product type, consumers switched away from the purchase of less-healthy food under taxation (9 percentage point decrease, p<0.001) and into healthier beverages (6 percentage point increase, p=0.001); there were no effects for labeling. Conditions were associated with the purchase of 11-14 fewer calories (9%-11% in relative terms) and 2 fewer grams of sugar. Results remained significant controlling for all items purchased in a single transaction. CONCLUSIONS: Taxation may induce consumers to purchase healthier foods and beverages. However, it is unclear whether the 15%-20% tax rates proposed in public policy discussions would be more effective than labeling products as less healthy.
BACKGROUND: To induce consumers to purchase healthier foods and beverages, some policymakers have suggested special taxes or labels on unhealthy products. The potential of such policies is unknown. PURPOSE: In a controlled field experiment, researchers tested whether consumers were more likely to purchase healthy products under such policies. METHODS: From October to December 2011, researchers opened a store at a large hospital that sold a variety of healthier and less-healthy foods and beverages. Purchases (N=3680) were analyzed under five conditions: a baseline with no special labeling or taxation, a 30% tax, highlighting the phrase "less healthy" on the price tag, and combinations of taxation and labeling. Purchases were analyzed in January-July 2012, at the single-item and transaction levels. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the various taxation conditions. Consumers were 11 percentage points more likely to purchase a healthier item under a 30% tax (95% CI=7%, 16%, p<0.001) and 6 percentage points more likely under labeling (95% CI=0%, 12%, p=0.04). By product type, consumers switched away from the purchase of less-healthy food under taxation (9 percentage point decrease, p<0.001) and into healthier beverages (6 percentage point increase, p=0.001); there were no effects for labeling. Conditions were associated with the purchase of 11-14 fewer calories (9%-11% in relative terms) and 2 fewer grams of sugar. Results remained significant controlling for all items purchased in a single transaction. CONCLUSIONS: Taxation may induce consumers to purchase healthier foods and beverages. However, it is unclear whether the 15%-20% tax rates proposed in public policy discussions would be more effective than labeling products as less healthy.
Authors: Leonard H Epstein; Noelle Jankowiak; Chantal Nederkoorn; Hollie A Raynor; Simone A French; Eric Finkelstein Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2012-02-29 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Paul A Fishman; Beth E Ebel; Michelle M Garrison; Dimitri A Christakis; Sarah E Wiehe; Frederick P Rivara Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Krista Casazza; Andrew Brown; Arne Astrup; Fredrik Bertz; Charles Baum; Michelle Bohan Brown; John Dawson; Nefertiti Durant; Gareth Dutton; David A Fields; Kevin R Fontaine; Steven Heymsfield; David Levitsky; Tapan Mehta; Nir Menachemi; P K Newby; Russell Pate; Hollie Raynor; Barbara J Rolls; Bisakha Sen; Daniel L Smith; Diana Thomas; Brian Wansink; David B Allison Journal: Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr Date: 2015 Impact factor: 11.176
Authors: Rachel A Crockett; Sarah E King; Theresa M Marteau; A T Prevost; Giacomo Bignardi; Nia W Roberts; Brendon Stubbs; Gareth J Hollands; Susan A Jebb Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-02-27
Authors: Ashkan Afshin; José L Peñalvo; Liana Del Gobbo; Jose Silva; Melody Michaelson; Martin O'Flaherty; Simon Capewell; Donna Spiegelman; Goodarz Danaei; Dariush Mozaffarian Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Simone A French; Sarah A Rydell; Nathan R Mitchell; J Michael Oakes; Brian Elbel; Lisa Harnack Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-09-16 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Jennifer E Pelletier; Caitlin E Caspi; Liana R N Schreiber; Darin J Erickson; Lisa Harnack; Melissa N Laska Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Katharine E Roberts; Louisa J Ells; Victoria J McGowan; Theodora Machaira; Victoria C Targett; Rachel E Allen; Alison E Tedstone Journal: Nutr Diabetes Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 5.097