Canadian Taxpayers Federation slams proposed tax on sweet drinks

0 Comments

first_imgBateman concludes taxes on food and drinks are nothing more than revenue generators for governments, as they take money out of the pockets of families struggling to make ends meet, and stuff it into their coffers.He also notes both the BC Liberals and the NDP rejected them in the last provincial election, and there’s no new evidence to suggest either party has changed its position. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling out the Canadian Diabetes Association for demanding a tax on sweet drinks.Is there any problem in the world these folks can’t solve with a prescription for another tax? No wonder the average Canadian family’s number one expense is taxes.They’re coming first for your devilish Coca-Cola and Pepsi. But they aren’t stopping there. They also want taxes on sugary fruit juice (you sinister Sun-Rype suckers!), and anything else that tastes slightly better than water.If they get their way, soon your pumpkin spice lattes (those fat-inducing fiends at Starbucks!), and your double-doubles (how could you do this to us, Tim Horton’s?), then chocolate and 2% milk (you should put water on your Cheerios!), before turning their attention to junk food, then cooking oil, and on and on.BC Director Jordan Bateman says the big problem with their proposition is that there’s no evidence it will work.He says a CTF report called Tax on the Menu cited multiple peer-reviewed, scientific studies, which showed no links between drinking pop and obesity.Advertisement – Advertisement -He argues that taxing selected foods or beverages in order to reduce obesity is a naïve solution to a complex condition with multiple determinants – including social, environmental, and biological factors.“These taxes generally are what they call ‘regressive taxes.’ They hurt people of lower incomes more than they hurt people of higher incomes,” said Bateman. “If you make pop more expensive, do you drive more people liquor?”To further make his point, Bateman also cited the experience of Demmark, which brought in a specific food and drink tax and saw some unforeseen side effects. Cross-border shopping in Germany went up by 50%, the economy “crumbled”, and grocery stores had to close.“It just didn’t work, and 10 months later, that tax was appealed unanimously,” Bateman said.Advertisementlast_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *