<b>OBJECTIVE: </b>To examine the effect of front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labelling and sugary drink taxation on consumer beverage purchases.<b>METHODS: </b>A total of 675 respondents aged 16 years and older participated in an experimental marketplace study using a 4 × 5 within-between group design. Participants were randomised to one of four labelling conditions (no label; star rating; high sugar symbol; health warning) and completed five within-subject purchase tasks. Beverage prices in each task corresponded to 'tax' conditions: 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% and a variable tax proportional to free sugar level. In each task, participants selected from 20 commercially available beverages; upon conclusion, one of five selections was randomly chosen for purchase.<b>RESULTS: </b>As price increased, participants were significantly less likely to select a sugary drink, and selected drinks with fewer calories and less free sugar (p < 0.001 for all). The overall effect of labelling was not statistically significant, although there was a trend for the 'high sugar' label to reduce the likelihood of selecting a sugary drink (p = 0.11) and encouraging participants to select drinks with less free sugar (p = 0.11).<b>CONCLUSIONS: </b>Increasing price was associated with reduced sugary drink purchases. Enhanced FOP labelling results highlight the need for further research to investigate their potential impact. The study adds empirical support for taxation to reduce sugary drink consumption.
BACKGROUND: Limited evidence has been gathered on the real-world impact of sugar-sweetened beverage price changes on purchasing behavior over time or in community-retail settings.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine changes in beverage purchases, business outcomes, and customer and retailer satisfaction associated with a retailer-led sugar-sweetened beverage price increase in a convenience store. We hypothesized that purchases of less-healthy beverages would decrease compared to predicted sales.
DESIGN: A convergent parallel mixed methods design complemented sales data (122 weeks pre-intervention, 17 weeks during intervention) with stakeholder interviews and customer surveys.
PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Electronic beverage sales data were collected from a convenience store in Melbourne, Australia (August through November 2015). Convenience store staff completed semi-structured interviews (n=4) and adult customers exiting the store completed surveys (n=352).
INTERVENTION: Beverages were classified using a state government framework. Prices of "red" beverages (eg, nondiet soft drinks, energy drinks) increased by 20%. Prices of "amber" (eg, diet soft drinks, small pure fruit juices) and "green" beverages (eg, water) were unchanged.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in beverage volume, item sales, and revenue during the intervention were compared with predicted sales.
STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Sales data were analyzed using time series segmented regression while controlling for pre-intervention trends, autocorrelation in sales data, and seasonal fluctuations.
RESULTS: Beverage volume sales of red (-27.6%; 95% CI -32.2 to -23.0) and amber (-26.7%; 95% CI -39.3 to -16.0) decreased, and volume of green beverages increased (+26.9%; 95% CI +14.1 to +39.7) in the 17th intervention week compared with predicted sales. Store manager and staff considered the intervention business-neutral, despite a small reduction in beverage revenue. Fifteen percent of customers noticed the price difference and 61% supported the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: A 20% sugar-sweetened beverage price increase was associated with a reduction in their purchases and an increase in purchases of healthier alternatives. Community retail settings present a bottom-up approach to improving consumer beverage choices.
BACKGROUND: This study evaluates changes in sales of non-alcoholic beverages in Jamie's Italian, a national chain of commercial restaurants in the UK, following the introduction of a £0.10 per-beverage levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and supporting activity including beverage menu redesign, new products and establishment of a children's health fund from levy proceeds.
METHODS: We used an interrupted time series design to quantify changes in sales of non-alcoholic beverages 12 weeks and 6 months after implementation of the levy, using itemised electronic point of sale data. Main outcomes were number of SSBs and other non-alcoholic beverages sold per customer. Linear regression and multilevel random effects models, adjusting for seasonality and clustering, were used to investigate changes in SSB sales across all restaurants (n=37) and by tertiles of baseline restaurant SSB sales per customer.
RESULTS: Compared with the prelevy period, the number of SSBs sold per customer declined by 11.0% (-17.3% to -4.3%) at 12 weeks and 9.3% (-15.2% to -3.2%) at 6 months. For non-levied beverages, sales per customer of children's fruit juice declined by 34.7% (-55.3% to -4.3%) at 12 weeks and 9.9% (-16.8% to -2.4%) at 6 months. At 6 months, sales per customer of fruit juice increased by 21.8% (14.0% to 30.2%) but sales of diet cola (-7.3%; -11.7% to -2.8%) and bottled waters (-6.5%; -11.0% to -1.7%) declined. Changes in sales were only observed in restaurants in the medium and high tertiles of baseline SSB sales per customer.
CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of a £0.10 levy on SSBs alongside complementary activities is associated with declines in SSB sales per customer in the short and medium term, particularly in restaurants with higher baseline sales of SSBs.
Background Taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) meant to improve health and raise revenue are being adopted, yet evaluation is scarce. This study examines the association of the first penny per ounce SSB excise tax in the United States, in Berkeley, California, with beverage prices, sales, store revenue/consumer spending, and usual beverage intake. Methods and findings Methods included comparison of pre-taxation (before 1 January 2015) and first-year post-taxation (1 March 2015–29 February 2016) measures of (1) beverage prices at 26 Berkeley stores; (2) point-of-sale scanner data on 15.5 million checkouts for beverage prices, sales, and store revenue for two supermarket chains covering three Berkeley and six control non-Berkeley large supermarkets in adjacent cities; and (3) a representative telephone survey (17.4% cooperation rate) of 957 adult Berkeley residents. Key hypotheses were that (1) the tax would be passed through to the prices of taxed beverages among the chain stores in which Berkeley implemented the tax in 2015; (2) sales of taxed beverages would decline, and sales of untaxed beverages would rise, in Berkeley stores more than in comparison non-Berkeley stores; (3) consumer spending per transaction (checkout episode) would not increase in Berkeley stores; and (4) self-reported consumption of taxed beverages would decline. Main outcomes and measures included changes in inflation-adjusted prices (cents/ounce), beverage sales (ounces), consumers’ spending measured as store revenue (inflation-adjusted dollars per transaction) in two large chains, and usual beverage intake (grams/day and kilocalories/day). Tax pass-through (changes in the price after imposition of the tax) for SSBs varied in degree and timing by store type and beverage type. Pass-through was complete in large chain supermarkets (+1.07¢/oz, p = 0.001) and small chain supermarkets and chain gas stations (1.31¢/oz, p = 0.004), partial in pharmacies (+0.45¢/oz, p = 0.03), and negative in independent corner stores and independent gas stations (−0.64¢/oz, p = 0.004). Sales-unweighted mean price change from scanner data was +0.67¢/oz (p = 0.00) (sales-weighted, +0.65¢/oz, p = 0.003), with +1.09¢/oz (p < 0.001) for sodas and energy drinks, but a lower change in other categories. Post-tax year 1 scanner data SSB sales (ounces/transaction) in Berkeley stores declined 9.6% (p < 0.001) compared to estimates if the tax were not in place, but rose 6.9% (p < 0.001) for non-Berkeley stores. Sales of untaxed beverages in Berkeley stores rose by 3.5% versus 0.5% (both p < 0.001) for non-Berkeley stores. Overall beverage sales also rose across stores. In Berkeley, sales of water rose by 15.6% (p < 0.001) (exceeding the decline in SSB sales in ounces); untaxed fruit, vegetable, and tea drinks, by 4.37% (p < 0.001); and plain milk, by 0.63% (p = 0.01). Scanner data mean store revenue/consumer spending (dollars per transaction) fell 18¢ less in Berkeley (−$0.36, p < 0.001) than in comparison stores (−$0.54, p < 0.001). Baseline and post-tax Berkeley SSB sales and usual dietary intake were markedly low compared to national levels (at baseline, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey SSB intake nationally was 131 kcal/d and in Berkeley was 45 kcal/d). Reductions in self-reported mean daily SSB intake in grams (−19.8%, p = 0.49) and in mean per capita SSB caloric intake (−13.3%, p = 0.56) from baseline to post-tax were not statistically significant. Limitations of the study include inability to establish causal links due to observational design, and the absence of health outcomes. Analysis of consumption was limited by the small effect size in relation to high standard error and Berkeley’s low baseline consumption. Conclusions One year following implementation of the nation’s first large SSB tax, prices of SSBs increased in many, but not all, settings, SSB sales declined, and sales of untaxed beverages (especially water) and overall study beverages rose in Berkeley; overall consumer spending per transaction in the stores studied did not rise. Price increases for SSBs in two distinct data sources, their timing, and the patterns of change in taxed and untaxed beverage sales suggest that the observed changes may be attributable to the tax. Post-tax self-reported SSB intake did not change significantly compared to baseline. Significant declines in SSB sales, even in this relatively affluent community, accompanied by revenue used for prevention suggest promise for this policy. Evaluation of taxation in jurisdictions with more typical SSB consumption, with controls, is needed to assess broader dietary and potential health impacts.
Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with increased risk of obesity, diabetes, heart disease and dental caries. Our aim was to assess the effects of plain packaging, warning labels, and a 20 % tax on predicted SSB preferences, beliefs and purchase probabilities amongst young people.
STUDY QUESTION: What has been the effect on purchases of beverages from stores in Mexico one year after implementation of the excise tax on sugar sweetened beverages?
METHODS: In this observational study the authors used data on the purchase of beverages in Mexico from January 2012 to December 2014 from an unbalanced panel of 6253 households providing 205 112 observations in 53 cities with more than 50 000 inhabitants. To test whether the post-tax trend in purchases was significantly different from the pretax trend, the authors used a difference in difference fixed effects model, which adjusts for both macroeconomic variables that can affect the purchase of beverages over time, and pre-existing trends. The variables used in the analysis included demographic information on household composition (age and sex of household members) and socioeconomic status (low, middle, and high). The authors compared the predicted volumes (mL/capita/day) of taxed and untaxed beverages purchased in 2014-the observed post-tax period-with the estimated volumes that would have been purchased if the tax had not been implemented (counterfactual) based on pretax trends.
STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS: Relative to the counterfactual in 2014, purchases of taxed beverages decreased by an average of 6% (-12 mL/capita/day), and decreased at an increasing rate up to a 12% decline by December 2014. All three socioeconomic groups reduced purchases of taxed beverages, but reductions were higher among the households of low socioeconomic status, averaging a 9% decline during 2014, and up to a 17% decrease by December 2014 compared with pretax trends. Purchases of untaxed beverages were 4% (36 mL/capita/day) higher than the counterfactual, mainly driven by an increase in purchases of bottled plain water.
WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: The tax on sugar sweetened beverages was associated with reductions in purchases of taxed beverages and increases in purchases of untaxed beverages. Continued monitoring is needed to understand purchases longer term, potential substitutions, and health implications.
FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING: This work was supported by grants from Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and by the Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública and the Carolina Population Center. The authors have no competing interests. No additional data are available.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption in Berkeley, California, which became the first US jurisdiction to implement such a tax ($0.01/oz) in March 2015.
METHODS: We used a repeated cross-sectional design to examine changes in pre- to posttax beverage consumption in low-income neighborhoods in Berkeley versus in the comparison cities of Oakland and San Francisco, California. A beverage frequency questionnaire was interviewer administered to 990 participants before the tax and 1689 after the tax (approximately 8 months after the vote and 4 months after implementation) to examine relative changes in consumption.
RESULTS: Consumption of SSBs decreased 21% in Berkeley and increased 4% in comparison cities (P = .046). Water consumption increased more in Berkeley (+63%) than in comparison cities (+19%; P < .01).
CONCLUSIONS: Berkeley's excise tax reduced SSB consumption in low-income neighborhoods. Evaluating SSB taxes in other cities will improve understanding of their public health benefit and their generalizability.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate changes in sales of sugar sweetened beverages (SSB) and plain water after a 1 peso per liter excise SSB tax was implemented in Mexico in January 2014.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used sales data from the Monthly Surveys of the Manufacturing Industry from January 2007 to December 2015. We estimated Ordinary Least Squares models to assess changes in per capita sales of SSB and plain water adjusting for seasonality and the global indicator of economic activity.
RESULTS: We found a decrease of 7.3% in per capita sales of SSB and an increase of 5.2% of per capita sales of plain water in 2014-2015 compared to the pre-tax period (2007-2013).
CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting for variables that change over time and that are associated with the demand for SSB, we found the tax was associated with a reduction in per capita sales of SSB. The effectiveness of the tax should be evaluated in the medium and long term.
Based on a laboratory experiment conducted with 131 adults (non-students subjects), we empirically examine the differential impacts of an inclusive and exclusive tax on changing consumers’ eating behavior. We compare the caloric and nutrient content of the meals selected by the subjects using a difference-in-difference regression model to determine the efficacy of the policy treatments. The results indicate that an inclusive tax has a significantly stronger effect on reducing the consumption of total calories, calories from fat, and the intake of carbohydrates, cholesterol, sugar and sodium compared with an exclusive tax.
Taxes and subsidies are a public health approach to improving nutrient quality of food purchases. While taxes or subsidies influence purchasing, it is unclear whether they influence total energy or overall diet quality of foods purchased. Using a within subjects design, selected low nutrient dense foods (e.g. sweetened beverages, candy, salty snacks) were taxed, and fruits and vegetables and bottled water were subsidized by 12.5% or 25% in comparison to a usual price condition for 199 female shoppers in an experimental store. Results showed taxes reduced calories purchased of taxed foods (coefficient = -6.61, CI = -11.94 to -1.28) and subsidies increased calories purchased of subsidized foods (coefficient = 13.74, CI = 8.51 to 18.97). However, no overall effect was observed on total calories purchased. Both taxes and subsidies were associated with a reduction in calories purchased for grains (taxes: coefficient = -6.58, CI = -11.91 to -1.24, subsidies: coefficient = -12.86, CI = -18.08 to -7.63) and subsidies were associated with a reduction in calories purchased for miscellaneous foods (coefficient = -7.40, CI = -12.62 to -2.17) (mostly fats, oils and sugars). Subsidies improved the nutrient quality of foods purchased (coefficient = 0.14, CI = 0.07 to 0.21). These results suggest that taxes and subsidies can influence energy purchased for products taxed or subsidized, but not total energy purchased. However, the improvement in nutrient quality with subsidies indicates that pricing can shift nutritional quality of foods purchased. Research is needed to evaluate if differential pricing strategies based on nutrient quality are associated with reduction in calories and improvement in nutrient quality of foods purchased.
To examine the effect of front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labelling and sugary drink taxation on consumer beverage purchases.
METHODS:
A total of 675 respondents aged 16 years and older participated in an experimental marketplace study using a 4 × 5 within-between group design. Participants were randomised to one of four labelling conditions (no label; star rating; high sugar symbol; health warning) and completed five within-subject purchase tasks. Beverage prices in each task corresponded to 'tax' conditions: 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% and a variable tax proportional to free sugar level. In each task, participants selected from 20 commercially available beverages; upon conclusion, one of five selections was randomly chosen for purchase.
RESULTS:
As price increased, participants were significantly less likely to select a sugary drink, and selected drinks with fewer calories and less free sugar (p < 0.001 for all). The overall effect of labelling was not statistically significant, although there was a trend for the 'high sugar' label to reduce the likelihood of selecting a sugary drink (p = 0.11) and encouraging participants to select drinks with less free sugar (p = 0.11).
CONCLUSIONS:
Increasing price was associated with reduced sugary drink purchases. Enhanced FOP labelling results highlight the need for further research to investigate their potential impact. The study adds empirical support for taxation to reduce sugary drink consumption.
