I must admit (and I'm sure I'm not alone on this) after the tobacco taxes came out a few years ago, the thought of taxing anything bad for your health did cross my mind.  And now that health care reform ranks at the top of the list of domestic concerns here in the U.S., the junk-food tax appears to be generating a bit more momentum these days.  And, well, I like the idea...at least at its core.

With rising health-care costs and still no ceiling in sight, why not tax the products that contribute to a lack of wellness...products associated with hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, and obesity to just name a few.  Not only might it not deter someone from purchasing a candy bar but instead choose the apple from the vending machine.  Granted Ben & Jerry pints have been out of my price range for quite some time, but throw another two dollars (or whatever tax percentage decided upon) on the store-based ice cream carton, and I think it can be effective.

Unfortunately, early research is demonstrating it is not as simple as taxing tobacco/cigarette products where smokers can either pay the tax or quit smoking.  One problem lies in where the line is drawn?  For instance, taxing sodas only increases the sales of sports drinks and juices...often beverages with higher calorie amounts.  So, do we tax just the saturated fat products, the sugar-based products, the salt-based products, all of them or just some of them?  And another dilemma appears to be how much of a tax?  10%, 20%...and again, early research is pointing to the disappointing fact that substantial tax hikes have only a minimal impact on obesity numbers.   

Granted, much needs to be worked out in regard to a junk-food tax, but I see it being one solution...of many needed...to help finance health-care reform and ultimately, hopefully, create a healthier nation.

And for those wondering if I'd be impacted by a junk-food tax.  Absolutely...ever hear of Cookie Monster?

Dr. Jeremy