* This is my article in BusinessWorld on August 03, 2017.
“To what extent will the poor merely replace more expensive colas and 3-in-1 coffee with unsafe sugared water in plastic bags, samalamig, or home-brewed sugared coffee, none of which are covered by the tax? … there is simply a great deal we do not know, which is all the more reason to proceed with reserve and caution.” — Emmanuel de Dios, “Just take it, it’s good for you”
Among the tax-tax-tax plan of Dutertenomics to finance the budget swell is premised on health alarmism, that government is concerned about public health and dangers of obesity so it will confiscate more money from the public via the sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax.
Simple joys of the poor like 3-in-1 coffee, mango or guyabano powdered juice, softdrinks, etc. add flavor to meals and whet more appetite so people eat more, which help their nutritional intake. But the government says this is bad and must be taxed.
Before you know it, the government will increase taxes twice, thrice, or even four times, citing whatever health alibi is handy when the real goal is to collect more money for the state, for the politicians, for the bureaucrats and their consultants, not to mention those who are already dependent too much on welfare.
There is one paper from Harvard Heart Letter that said: “Eating too much added sugar increases the risk of dying with heart disease” by Julie Corliss (updated Nov. 30, 2016).
“Sugar-sweetened beverages such as sodas, energy drinks, and sports drinks are by far the biggest sources of added sugar in the average American’s diet. They account for more than one-third of the added sugar we consume as a nation. Other important sources include cookies, cakes, pastries, and similar treats; fruit drinks; ice cream, frozen yogurt and the like; candy; and ready-to-eat cereals.”
Since this seems an authoritative article, then the SSB tax of Dutertenomics suffers from an old disease of selective harassment and taxation.
If they have to be consistent, they should tax not only soda, powdered juice, energy drinks but also cakes, ice cream, chocolates, cookies, yogurt, candy, pastries, samalamig, banana-Q, etc.
If all the claims of various health and environmentalist groups are true — that there are more diseases, morbidity, and mortality due to high sugar consumption, man-made climate change, high maternal death, etc. — then life expectancy of Filipinos should be declining, not rising.
Numbers below show that this is not the case — that life expectancy among Filipinos and other people in the region are rising (see table).
From only around 61 years in 1970, Filipinos are living longer and healthier compared to the past and they can expect to live to 68 years old, as of 2015. This, despite the fact that more Filipinos are eating and drinking more “unhealthy” products.
So, what to do?
One, the government should not impose a sugar tax. No to selective harassment and taxation of sugar-sweetened drinks and food and confiscation of more money from the pockets of ordinary Filipinos.
Two, if they have to tax some sugar-sweetened beverages, they should tax all of them without exceptions. Just keep the tax as low as possible.
Three, proceeds from the substantial sin tax revenues should be enough to promote health awareness and finance the fight against infectious and communicable diseases on top of regular DoH and LGUs’ health budget.
Health is not just a “right” but more importantly, health is also a personal responsibility.
It is very likely that proceeds from the tax are designed more to pay the multitrillion-peso loans to Duterte-beloved China-funded infrastructure programs. And since this government is run like a one-party state, they will get what they want from Congress.
Tax-tax-tax mentality and policy is wrong and ugly. And this is the philosophy that Dutertenomics wants to impose on the whole country.