Latest healthcare idea: ‘Twinkie tax’
July 31, 2009 by Jim GiulianoPosted in: Health care, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
Amid the arguments over how to pay for healthcare reform comes an old idea in a new package: taxing fatty foods.
A study released by the Urban Institute and the University of Virginia has caught some lawmakers’ attention, mainly because the study revealed a tax goldmine for funding health care. For example, the study shows over the next 10 years:
- A 10% excise or sales tax on fattening foods could raise $522 billion.
- A 20% tax could raise $937 billion.
Not surprisingly, industry groups strongly oppose the idea.
An organization called Americans Against Food Taxes — supported by, among others, the National Restaurant Association, the American Beverage Association and the National Grocers Association – argues that such taxes are unfair and unneeded.
The Urban Institute study points out that not only would fat-food taxes raise money, but they also would discourage consumption of unhealthy foods.
Industry groups aren’t crazy about that prospect, either.
Tags: Health care, tax, University of Virginia, Urban Insitute
August 3rd, 2009 at 10:05 am
Get ready — it won’t belong before there will be a scale at the door of restaurants to make sure you are the proper weight before you can enter to order a “healthy” meal since that will be all that is available. It is understood that a healthier diet can result in a healthier person but the government has no business trying to legislate this area.
August 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 am
Does it not cross the minds of our political knotheads that if they are having to get this creative to pay for ‘reform’ maybe the truth is we just can’t afford it and they need to drop it!!!
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:12 am
I disagree….If the government has to pay to keep you alive through Medicare or Medicaid or just showing up in the ER, then you at least could have contributed more to help cover those costs. Even if you do have your own insurance, the bad habits may have helped lead you to the hospital, meaning your insurance had more to pay for and that you probably got more out of your insurance than what you put into it, and those costs were put on to others. Seriously, I have little to no tolerance for the unhealthy and living unhealthy at this point, especially when they get sick and others have to pay for their sickness. People need to be responsible for their actions, but Health care has to be viewed as a right and supported as such, not a half-ass broken system that it is.
Seriously, we can’t make people healthy and keep them from getting sick, it’s just not possible, but we can encourage and promote healthy habits, even though discouragement of bad habits.
Also the problem with the system: How much cheaper is it to get fast food than to dine some place healthy? Calorie per dollar, typical fast food dominates, it’s the cheapest way to feed yourself other than going to the Supermarket. And at the supermarket, how much cheaper is it for the bad food at a Wal-Mart or another supermarket than it is to shop at a very wholesome place such as Whole Foods or Trader Joe’s?
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:15 am
Fat tax, a good one, win win for the tax and spend and will help out the fat one, the army had the scale in the late 50 had to weigh in and over weight, you got a white band on your left arm and no dessert and smaller portion, any tax applied to all 300 million people is a good tax start with tobacco, beer wine, gambling, latto winnings, toll roads, cosmeics, any and all luxury jewerly, pop and limit the travel to government travel that is not necessary
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:25 am
A tax on “fat foods” to support healthcare reform seems like an intrusion on freedom of choice. And now the feds are considering a tax on vegetable gardens, and on raising your own animals for food, such as chickens and beef. There is nothing unhealthy about raising your own food. But it will be taxed along with the unhealthy foods. The bottom line is this . . . more taxes, less choices.
August 3rd, 2009 at 11:49 am
health care, and the campaign trail, promises made that no tax increase on anyone that makes 200 $ or less, and 95% balcks voted for obamma because of they will get insurance and jobs, and the truth they and the middle class are going to be disppointed, when you are buying votes and making promises, you have to be very careful to not let you mouth over load your feet and you are seeing more and more, and all the double constructed comments say one thing and do another, constantly
August 3rd, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Any taxes are intrusions on freedom. Same goes for laws. But without taxes, we can’t support government or anything government related. And without the government, we are missing a lot of things, and the anarchy would be utter chaos. We need to support health care, whether we like to or not, and to encourage the betterment of society. Now, I don’t necessarily support this legislation as I don’t find this the best way to go about funding health care or reducing costs, but I agree with the general concept. If you do something unhealthy, you have to pay into the system that will help support your care, or likeliness of care, for when you get sick later on.
August 3rd, 2009 at 1:28 pm
we said we wanted change didn’t we…well, it’s here
August 3rd, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I agree with RWA, you should help pay your share to help support your care. Employers are concerned with the cost of healthcare for employees (while they are still relatively healthy) and want to discourage unhealthy habits that might affect their bottom line like smoking and overeating. Those costs do not get picked up by the government for those with healthcare insurance.
It is further known that those who have unhealthy lifestyles cost the government significantly less (10 to 26% on average) than the healthy ones. It’s not that they don’t have healthcare costs, however the healthy individuals will cost FAR MUCH MORE as they will go through many more procedures over the course of their life that the unhealthy. So it makes sense that anyone leading a healthy lifestyle should pay 10 to 26% more than those who are unhealthy and cost the government less.
August 4th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Mike R, ? http://www.examiner.com/x-15753-SF-Wellness-Examiner~y2009m7d2-Staggering-health-care-costs-due-to-unhealthy-lifestyle-pose-major-threat-to-US-economy
I think your information is flawed. It was once thought that obesity and other bad habits would just lead to death earlier and thus lead to lower costs. However, it was further found that is not really true; those people are living almost as long, they just tend to be sicker much much longer. I just saw it where someone’s bad choices put them in the hospital and probably has cost tens of thousands of dollars, if not 100s, to treat. The person will live and probably will live for quite a while (although probably not as long as she potentially could), and will likely need more treatment than a normal person would.
August 4th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
Actually, the link you provide makes my point. Other countries do not pass the cost of healthcare to their employers like the US system. And I agree, for the short run, those who exhibit unhealthy lifestyles can cost more to a system designed to insure the healthy. However, the cost to the overall healthcare system is less because they do not live as long. The studies you point to reflect the view of healthcare insurance and employers. It does not look at the overall cost of healthcare from cradle to grave. Actually, I have found that the health insurance industry stifles any studies of this sort in the US. I do know it was conducted in Holland and that is where the overall cost and savings of 10 to 26% was derived.
So let the smokers and over eaters pay more for their healthcare insurance premiums while employed and exempt them from having to pay the costs owed by the healthy ones to cover their costs in old age.
August 4th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
The bottom line is the average American has the free will to make choices, but then refuses to take responsibility for the consequences.
August 4th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
So true Essie.
The choice to live a long and healthy life has costs. In today’s society we have come to look down on those who make choices we consider unhealthy and have even gone so far as to try to burden them with our share of our healthcare costs. This view is promoted by the healthcare insurance industry who has to pay for short term illnesses frequently experienced by unhealthy lifestyles.
So many people think that the healthcare crisis is caused by unhealthy choices. That dog don’t hunt. Over the past 40 years our society is eating healthier and smoking less and the cost of healthcare has skyrocketed, especially in medicare/ medicaid costs. There is also the fact that due to unhealthy choices, many procedures are not even available to those with unhealthy lifestyles. A heavy drinker will not be considered for a liver transplant; a heavy smoker will not be considered for a lung translplant; diabetics are not considered for many procedures due to healing issues. Yet the longer you live, the more likely it is for you to need these lifesaving procedures even if you have never smoked, drank, or over ate. If all the smokers and overeaters died tomorrow, the healthy would then have to face the fact that they are expensive to maintain and they have had a relatively free ride up until now.
August 4th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
No, the healthcare crisis is caused from poor health choices and lack of sufficient or any insurance. The old and healthy aging do not have that much to do with it, except for Medicare costs of course. Our current system is bogged down in many aspects by obesity. But I do see the article, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22995659/from/ET/ I really think this study should be repeated in other cultures and other elements added and tested.
August 7th, 2009 at 11:09 am
how is the “fat tax” different than taxing cigarettes?
August 10th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Its another tax on the sector of society least capable of affording to pay it. Do you think many wealthy families are stocking Twinkies on a daily basis? When will govt get back to just protecting our borders and sovereignty rather than trying to run our daily lives? It gets a little disheartening.
August 10th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
The reality is that when I was the ‘poorest’ in my life was when I put on the most weight since the food I could afford was mostly pasta which went right to my hips and thighs.
“Healthy food” costs more.
So essentially this ‘fat tax’ is going to penalize the poor more in proportion . . . par for the course when you get the government involved.
August 11th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
If you want people to pay their fair share, how about letting them pay for their own damn health insurance, otherwise it’s time to thin the heard. Survival of the fitest. Let the slow moving and weak perish.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Jon, do you hate your parents / elderly family so much? Or do you really think this will not affect you and yours? Some day you will be in slow moving and weak class. Will the shoe be on the other foot or do you have such a zero tolerance for this class you will choose an alternate course???
August 11th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Taxing fatty foods is no more unfair than taxing cigarettes. You can die of obesity or you can die from smoking. Either way…you quit smoking, you gain weight. It’s a lose/lose situation.
August 12th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Jo,
My parents saw to it that they had health Insurance and they had a life time to to arrange it. I spefically bought a home with an in-law suite so I could care for my mom, I do walk the walk. It would be extremely unfair to tax others to care for my mom or any senior citizen when they have had 65 years to get their act together. I stand by my previous statement, its a harsh reality, but reality nonetheless.
August 12th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Jon,
Are you really that naive? At the age of 65, what coverage do they have? What health insurance company lets you pay in when you are young and healthy to cover when you are old and impaired (except life insurance)?
Your comment about thinning the herd is true. Once the weak and unhealthy are removed, then the predators go for the healthy. The predators, by the way, are the health insurance companies that will insure you at a premium cost when you are healthy and then kick you to the government system when you are ill.
Healthcare costs more over a lifetime for a healthy person. It goes against the propaganda you have been fed for years, but it is true. The smokers and over eaters die before they get the real expensive care and maintenance. They are often denied procedures due to their health conditions.
Families are going broke, inheritances are stolen all because so many are willing to focus on smokers and over eaters and not on the unfair healthcare system.
August 12th, 2009 at 10:40 am
mike, I think you are right, in part, but I hope you aren’t anti-healthcare reform! I thought it was quite ironic when an anti-reformist,without insurance, got sick and had to have a fundraiser to help pay his bills. I hope that changed his mind!
August 12th, 2009 at 10:50 am
while watching the hand picked meeting I was curious as to what is a boggieman, where do they live, when do they come out, at night or after dark, how do you known when you see one, does it take a boggieman to call another a boggieman
August 12th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Mike, Ever hear of Savings accounts, Money Markets, 401K and IRA’s? Then you can pay for the health insurance you need.
As for health care reform, if government wants to regulate health care providers and insurance companies, fine, those details could be debated. As for taxing people, not a chance, should never happen. The tabbaco and alcahol tax doesn’t go to provide health care, neither will a fat tax.
No need to be insutling either.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Sorry Jon, I didn’t mean for the term “naïve” to be derogatory. I was trying to understand some of your callous statements. It seemed to me either you were naïve, independently wealthy, or an employee of the healthcare insurance industry. From your last post, I get the impression that you have done well in the stock market and have not experienced the losses that most Americans have. Good for you. Of course, you know that the stock market is just as good as a casino or lottery tickets for long term financial security.
As far as healthcare reform, I do believe that the system is screwed up. It has been since the 60’s but it has never been bad enough for the majority of Americans to be concerned. Now as so many middle income baby boomers are about to retire and are facing a real crisis for healthcare and the downturn of the economy and the losses in retirement income and skyrocketing unemployment, it has come to the forefront again. I agree that the healthcare system needs reform. There is too much duplication and inefficiency. Every doctor should not have to be a “specialist” and have their own MRI to get paid enough to pay off college loans. The regulatory and insurance industry has set up the current system. The real reforms need to be made with the healthcare insurance system where the real inefficiencies exist. The cost they charge to administer the healthiest Americans is outrageous. Each policy is capped so that when that is reached, they are dumped so the government picks them up. In order to have an effective system, the savings (which the insurance companies call profits) when a person is young and healthy should be applied to the costs down the road when they will need care.
My fear about this healthcare reform process is that it will become a compromise which will result in the majority to become complacent again. This cost of healthcare will bankrupt everyone. Currently it is doing it the old fashioned way, one family at a time.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Oh, Jon,
I do whole heartedly agree about not taxing for healthcare. It should not happen, doesn’t work to pay the costs, and is wrong on so many levels. It keeps the focus and debate on smokers and fatties, keeps everyone pointing fingers and blaming. It DOES serve the purpose of distracting everyone from the insurance industry and their part in the current problem.
August 12th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
I again disagree. I don’t want to pay the taxes, yet I think everyone should pay into health insurance and health care. It’s the only way. My current insurance, which is a good plan, goes not just to my coverage but also the coverage of others as well that went to the hospital without insurance and thus drove the hospital to negotiate higher reimbursements. It also goes to all the highly paid execs and what not that run the insurance companies. It’s just too much of an unregulated mess.
August 12th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Adding to the already astounding tax burden of all of us simply has to end. There will come a point where enough politicians realize that there is not an endless supply of taxpayers willing to pay for everything in the politicians wildest dreams. If the govt must take some tax (they must for defense and border control only), then take the same % from everyone. Why do they continue to demonize the successful and forgive the failures? I guess it comes from the fact that few in Congress actually ran a business or worked much before their election to office. Depts that should go: energy, education, NPR, transportation, homeland security, HHS, HUD, czars of all kinds, endowment for the arts, etc… Please just leave the people alone to thrive and succeed without making it more difficult at every turn.
August 13th, 2009 at 8:49 am
Hi Gene, please let me know if you intend on ever running for office so I know not to vote for you. Also, please let me know who you intend to vote for so that I know who not to vote for.
August 13th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Gene, Please run for office.
August 13th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Gene,
In my heart I agree with you. Going back less than a hundred years ago, we did not have a federal income tax. I fear the problem with the bloated government is the same as the health insurance industry. It has grown to what it is today and there is no will to really put the genie back in the bottle. The government is the most inefficient way to get money to the poor.
When law makers set the budget, they have to please constituents. They don’t make choices very well, so they vote for everything. Currently with the economic downturn, government is having to shrink to meet the tax revenues. Perhaps in the end, when the economy picks back up, the government will remaind lean and mean, but I doubt it.
September 8th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
I vote for Gene!