The Fat Tax: Fighting America’s Present to Save Its Future

What makes America stand out from the other nations is size. With technology and its progressions, citizens have also faced this growing specter of obesity, from “an imbalance of calorie intake and output”. The increase in the accessibility of food and technological progress have also decreased physical exertion and further increased caloric intake. It does not affect just adults, but children too. Such metabolic disorders are considered collectively as a “risk factor for major causes of mortality and morbidity.” (Strnad 1223) What is the fat tax? The fat tax, also known as the “Twinkie” tax, is a tax on snack foods and other unhealthy, easily accessible, high-preservative products. The fat tax is considered an “upstream” intervention” because it “[aims] to elicit changes in the performance environment such that undesired habits are prevented and desired habits can flourish.” (Maio 118) Although the addition of taxes are theoretically effective in deterring consumers from purchasing such unhealthy snacks and sodas, the solutions have faced a lot of fire from consumers and producers. The debate on choice seems to play a role, as the government should maintain a lesser amount of bureaucracy and a laissez-faire attitude towards consumer choice, as interference of personal liberties and additional bureaucracy is undesired. The fat tax also, in the perspective of consumers and economists, presents more demand towards individuals of lower income groups than those of a higher income, as junk food is considered an inferior good, as it is sold at a low price for mass consumption and corporate profit. Finally, junk food industries, which are more interested in profits than public health, attempt to halt such propositions by buying off legislation. Sadly, despite the good that such fat taxes would bring, the legislation has voted against such proposals, possibly because of the industries or possibly because of the consumers.

The Good

Individuals who are for the fat tax state that this sort of tax is a “public health initiative, the goal being to improve people’s health.” (Strnaud 1227) The population is directed towards eating healthier foods and considering attaining an active lifestyle, and the government earns funds from more dependent individuals.

More dependent individuals will be more insensitive to price because psychologically, they interpret that item that they are addicted to as a “need”, so the demand for the good, for that individual, will increase. In the economic perspective, “when someone is addicted to a product, the demand curve for the good is highly inelastic.” (Guell 207) Individuals are dependent upon those goods, so they will attribute the good as a “need”. Such a tax could work as a self-control mechanism, since “instead of tearing up a dollar, the [addict] gives it to the government.” (Strnaud 1247)