Health Policy Assignment 2022

Running Head: HEALTH POLICY
HEALTH POLICY
Name
Professor
Institution
Course
Date

HEALTH POLICY 2
Overview
The imposition of sugar-sweetened beverage tax in Australia is a significant move that
will help in the reduction of the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB). The
policymakers consider the health and economic effects across the socio-economic groups before
imposing these particular types of taxes. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the impacts of
the sugar-sweetened beverages to the society, the effects of imposing taxes on the beverages, the
functions of policymakers in the implementation of the imposed taxes and a SWOT analysis for
the existence of these beverages in the market. The paper will also examine the impacts of SSB
tax on the people of Australia. The objectives of this paper will include the intervention elements
that generate a change in the SSB conduct in children and grow-ups, and the evaluation of
intervention scopes that generate change in SSB intake in children or adults. The paper will also
aim at identifying the effectiveness of interventions targeting the SSBs to lower the health
inequalities.
Obesity around the Globe
Obesity has been a common prevalence in developed countries. The latter is most evident
in the most disadvantaged groups in these countries. The public health policy, therefore, has been
aiming to reduce the health inequalities amid the advantaged and the disadvantaged groups
(Falbe, Thompson, Becker, Rojas, McCulloch, & Madsen, 2016). There is an evidenced
association that links the sugar-sweetened beverages with increased energy intake causing
obesity and overweight in communities. Obesity is risk factors that cause diabetes and
cardiovascular disease among many other complications. The economic impacts of SSB tax lie
on the notion of the internalization of externality within the buying price (Powell, Wada,
Persky, & Chaloupk, 2014).

HEALTH POLICY 3
Planning Tools
There has been general SSB campaigns going on in Australia entitled don’t Sugarcoat our
Kinds which is a SSB organizing Toolkit for the wellbeing of Kids.
There is also the Boston Healthy Beverage toolkit that includes the recommended
practices for promoting beverage choices that are based on the choices and the current science
and the national recommendations and standards (Batis, Rivera, Popkin, & Taillie, 2016).
The ‘Stop Sugary Drinks Initiative from Our Kids’ campaign aimed at educating the public on
alternative drinks that are readily available and which cannot land people to obesity and
overweight ailments.
Impacts of SSB Tax
Research shows that households with lower income have an upsurge of response to the
increase in prices. They are most likely going to change their consumption tactics in response to
the change in prices (Colchero, Guerrero-López, Molina, & Rivera, 2016). The economic
effect of SSB tax has for various socio-economic position clusters has been explored in terms of
the tax burden incurred by individuals and particular groups. Research from Australia shows that
SSB tax would cause an increase in cost saving in the health departments. Given that there is a
model strategy meant to impose a 40% sales tax, the tax will have several impacts on body
weight, health modeling, and several assessment costs (Backholer, Blake, & Vandevijvere,
2017).
The enactment of 40% sales tax in Australia would lead to a more significant decrease in
for the Australians overweight cases and obesity. The expected out of pocket tax expenditure
would also reduce (Zhen, Brissette , & Ruff, 2014). The loss of consumer welfare would

HEALTH POLICY 4
even be outweighed by the quantity of tax introduced. The World Health Organization
recommends that young adults and children to not more than 10 percent of their daily energy
intake. The latter is also said to provide an additional 5 percent gains in the health benefits. The
organization also recommends that adults should reduce their sugar consumption to less than six
spoonfuls a day (Batis, Rivera, Popkin, & Taillie, 2016).
Increased consumption of sugar increases the number of health complaints, including the
most common ones, which are tooth decay, obesity, and type 2 diabetes. Research shows that
63.4 percent of Australians are either obese or overweight. The high level of sugar in the body
has led to many health professionals and economists to advocate for the imposition of the 40%
tax on the SSBs (Backholer, Blake, & Vandevijvere, 2016). The Australian beverage
industry claims that it is making a legal obligation to ensure that it becomes part of the solution
to obesity. The legal act of the firm is, however, to act in the interest of shareholders and also
make maximum sales as permitted by the law. The public health advocates on the other side
argue that the beverage industry has a conflict of interest as far as the consumption of its
products is concerned, and therefore it cannot be used in the enactment of the public interest
since its primary goal is to maximize on profits (Lal, et al., 2016).
Other arguments oppose the motion of the imposition of 40% tax on SSBs claiming that
taxes on SSBs are regressive since they make the low-income earners weaker when the
consumption of SSBs is concerned (Backholer & Martin, 2017; Dharmasena, Davis, &
Capps, 2014). It would therefore not be fair to make the poor people in the society pay
increased taxes for these SSBs with their limited income when compared to the wealthy persons.
However, the Australians of low socio-economic position derive the most significant benefit
from the reduced consumption of SSBs since it is the group that is adversely affected by the high