Literature DB >> 31087022

Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting.

Christina A Roberto1, Hannah G Lawman2, Michael T LeVasseur1, Nandita Mitra3, Ana Peterhans1, Bradley Herring4, Sara N Bleich5.   

Abstract

Importance: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce).
Objectives: To compare changes in beverage prices and sales following the implementation of the tax in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore, Maryland (a control city without a tax) and to assess potential cross-border shopping to avoid the tax in neighboring zip codes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used a difference-in-differences approach and analyzed sales data to compare changes between January 1, 2016, before the tax, and December 31, 2017, after the tax. Differences by store type, beverage sweetener status, and beverage size were examined. The commercial retailer sales data included large chain store sales in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Pennsylvania zip codes bordering Philadelphia. These data reflect approximately 25% of the ounces of taxed beverages sold in Philadelphia. Exposures: Philadelphia's tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in taxed beverage prices and volume sales.
Results: A total of 291 stores (54 supermarkets, 20 mass merchandise stores, 217 pharmacies) were analyzed. The mean price per ounce of taxed beverages in Philadelphia increased from 5.43 cents in 2016 to 6.24 cents in 2017 at supermarkets; from 5.28 cents to 6.24 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.60 cents to 8.28 cents at pharmacies. The mean price per ounce in Baltimore increased from 5.33 cents in 2016 to 5.50 cents in 2017 at supermarkets, from 6.34 cents to 6.52 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.76 cents to 6.93 cents at pharmacies. The mean per-ounce difference in price between the 2 cities was 0.65 cents (95% CI, 0.60 cents-0.69 cents; P<.001) at supermarkets; 0.87 cents (95 % CI, 0.72 cents-1.02 cents; P<.001) at mass merchandise stores, and 1.56 cents (95% CI, 1.50 cents-1.62 cents; P<.001) at pharmacies. Total volume sales of taxed beverages in Philadelphia decreased by 1.3 billion ounces (from 2.475 billion to 1.214 billion) or by 51.0% after tax implementation. Volume sales in the Pennsylvania border zip codes, however, increased by 308.2 million ounces (from 713.1 million to 1.021 billion), offsetting the decrease in Philadelphia's volume sales by 24.4%. In Philadelphia, beverage volume sales in ounces per 4-week period between before and after tax periods decreased from 4.85 million to 1.99 million at supermarkets, from 2.98 million to 1.72 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.16 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. In Baltimore, the beverage volume sales in ounces decreased from 2.83 million to 2.81 million at supermarkets, from 1.05 million to 1.00 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.14 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. This was a 58.7% reduction at supermarkets (difference-in-differences, -2.85 million ounces; 95% CI, -4.10 million to -1.60 million ounces; P < .001), 40.4% reduction at mass merchandise stores (difference-in-differences, -1.20 million ounces; 95% CI, -2.04 million to -0.36 million ounces; P = .001), and 12.6% reduction in pharmacies (difference-in-differences, -0.02 million ounces; 95% CI, -0.03 million to -0.01 million ounces; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In Philadelphia in 2017, the implementation of a beverage excise tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages was associated with significantly higher beverage prices and a significant and substantial decline in volume of taxed beverages sold. This decrease in taxed beverage sales volume was partially offset by increases in volume of sales in bordering areas.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31087022      PMCID: PMC6518342          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.4249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  44 in total

Review 1.  What Should I Eat and Why? The Environmental, Genetic, and Behavioral Determinants of Food Choice: Summary from a Pennington Scientific Symposium.

Authors:  Emily Qualls-Creekmore; Kara L Marlatt; Esther Aarts; Annadora Bruce-Keller; Tim S Church; Karine Clément; Jennifer O Fisher; Penny Gordon-Larsen; Christopher D Morrison; Helen E Raybould; Donna H Ryan; Philip R Schauer; Alan C Spector; Maartje S Spetter; Garret D Stuber; Hans-Rudolf Berthoud; Eric Ravussin
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 5.002

Review 2.  Do taxes on unhealthy foods and beverages influence food purchases?

Authors:  Gary Sacks; Janelle Kwon; Kathryn Backholer
Journal:  Curr Nutr Rep       Date:  2021-04-30

3.  Perspective: Childhood Obesity Requires New Strategies for Prevention.

Authors:  Barbara J Deal; Mark D Huffman; Helen Binns; Neil J Stone
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 8.701

4.  Incorrect Axis Alignment in Figure.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Higher Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Retail Prices After Excise Taxes in Oakland and San Francisco.

Authors:  Jennifer Falbe; Matthew M Lee; Scott Kaplan; Nadia A Rojas; Alberto M Ortega Hinojosa; Kristine A Madsen
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Data, Language, and Author Contribution Errors.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2019-09-10       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes: Emerging Evidence on a New Public Health Policy.

Authors:  Kristine A Madsen; James Krieger; Xavier Morales
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Warning Labels Reduce Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Intake among College Students.

Authors:  Cindy W Leung; Julia A Wolfson; Robert Hsu; Keith Soster; Steve Mangan; Jennifer Falbe
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.798

9.  Missed Opportunities: The Need to Promote Public Knowledge and Awareness of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes.

Authors:  Emily A Altman; Kristine A Madsen; Laura A Schmidt
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Bending the Curve in Cardiovascular Disease Mortality: Bethesda + 40 and Beyond.

Authors:  David Calvin Goff; Sadiya Sana Khan; Donald Lloyd-Jones; Donna K Arnett; Mercedes R Carnethon; Darwin R Labarthe; Matthew Shane Loop; Russell V Luepker; Michael V McConnell; George A Mensah; Mahasin S Mujahid; Martin Enrique O'Flaherty; Dorairaj Prabhakaran; Véronique Roger; Wayne D Rosamond; Stephen Sidney; Gina S Wei; Janet S Wright
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 29.690

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.