Drinks with high content of sugar will be taxed 20-25 percent

[siamcrut]

And when do they ban or tax the stalls, selling crushed ice with colored sugar-sirup to the kids in front of almost every school?

[canuckamuck]

Perhaps there will finally be some unsweetened alternatives on the shelves.

The problem with all sweeteners (Sugar free) is that has a bigger health risk than sugar.

By Dr. Mercola

If you've added the artificial sweetener sucralose (brand name Splenda) to your diet because you think it's a healthy alternative to sugar, you're being dangerously misled. Research from the Ramazzini Institute has linked the popular sugar alternative to cancer, specifically leukemia.

The findings were first presented at a London cancer conference in 2012 and prompted The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) to downgrade Splenda from its "safe" category to one of "caution."

Now that the study has been published in a peer-reviewed journal, CSPI has again downgraded Splenda, this time from "caution" to "avoid."

I did say unsweetened.

[SABloke]

That means my Diet Pepsi will remain the same price NO TAX NO SUGAR

Doubt it

[Siamthomas]

This so called government is so bad that they are targeting everything popular to raise taxes by obsurd amounts right acrosd the board. Prayuth has killed the economy with no regard

[SABloke]

And when do they ban or tax the stalls, selling crushed ice with colored sugar-sirup to the kids in front of almost every school?

Or the school themselves selling iced coffee to the kids (anuban nd prathom welcome).

[syke1912]

Manufacturers could care less. Like everything else, increased cost will be passed on to consumer.

Obviously sales will decrease as demand will decrease as is the case with any significant tax hike.

This ia bad news for the corporations without question.

[aneliane]

it took 2 days to invent a new tax.

But violent thugs won't get harsher punishments

Edited May 3, 2016 by aneliane

[scubascuba3]

It's a good move, in fact i think its the best thing ive ever heard of in Thailand. But, tax raised may be a lot lower than expected as manufacturers will provide artificial sweetener options. The new Coke zero sugar options are coming out in the UK in June.

I avoid artificial sweeteners as much as possible now, but if i really fancy a fizzy drink, that's what i go for.

Edited May 3, 2016 by scubascuba3

[alocacoc]

And what about Thai food? Look at the curry's. Plenty of sugar in it. Even in their noodle dishes and soups. And tons of MSG.

pathetic.

[wprime]

Is the tax on the whole drink or just the sugar component. 'cause if they only tax the sugar component it'll really only be a 19-24% tax.

[impulse]

I was wondering whether they'd test the blood or the urine of the drunks for sugar content.

Then I put on my glasses...

[Xonax]

I would definitely be happy to buy soft-drinks with a sugar content below 6 grammes/100 millilitre. Unfortunately these have so far not been available, but maybe a new business opportunity for someone?

[KenKadz]

Bringing Happy to the People.... Again!

[anotheruser]

Why just non-alcoholic drinks with high sugar content, surely the way around this is to add alcohol to an existing sugar laden drink?

Makes sense as alcohol isn't subject to a high tax rate.

[Squeegee]

That'll minorly flip off a few school management persons, having to switch over to flogging low sugar. I hereby predict a huge upsurge in healthy crap for kids. Less bouncing off the walls is always going to help though, though helping in what I fail to see any more.

[GOLDBUGGY]

In my view this is only a spit in the ocean compared to what else is out there now. Like Chocolate Bars, Ice Cream, Candies, Cookies, and baked goods like Pies and Cakes. All I can see happening here is more people turning to Zero Coke as that should be 20% cheaper. .

[alocacoc]

Just in the news;

By Amy Guthrie in Mexico City and Mike Esterl in Atlanta

Sales of soda are climbing two years after Mexico imposed a roughly 10% tax on sugary drinks -- a bright spot for an industry that has feared it could be cast as the next tobacco.

Mexico's tax was an attempt to cap alarming obesity and diabetes rates in a country where per-capita soda consumption is the highest in the world. It came at a time when then Mayor Michael Bloomberg was trying to limit sales of the beverages in New York City, and more countries are weighing a similar tax.

Purchases, however, are rising in Mexico after an initial drop, making the country a key-growth market again for soda giants Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. Underscoring the resiliency of sugary drinks, the tax of one peso per liter has raised more than $2 billion since January 2014, about a third more than the government expected.

"Coke is like cigarettes -- it turns you into an addict," said Luis de León, a 24-year-old Mexico City parking attendant, who stood next to a three-liter bottle he recently shared with two other valets.

Mr. De León said he stopped drinking soda for a month after seeing a publicity campaign financed by Bloomberg Philanthropies that linked diabetes to sugary beverages and asked Mexicans if they would eat 12 spoonfuls of sugar, roughly the amount in Coke's popular 600-milliliter bottle.

While that public-health campaign is long gone, soda-makers continue to advertise their products heavily and say it is unfair to single out something representing less than 10% of daily caloric intake.

Coca-Cola Femsa SAB, the country's largest Coke bottler, said last Wednesday that its Mexican soda volumes rose 5.5% in the first quarter from a year earlier. Arca Continental SAB, the No. 2 Coke bottler, reported soda volumes surged 11%.

The turnaround began last year, when Mexican soda-industry volumes rose 0.5% after falling 1.9% in 2014, data service Canadean said. Consumers also aren't flocking to untaxed zero-calorie sodas. The market shares of full-calorie Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola inched higher last year to 48% and 11%, respectively, according to Euromonitor, another data service.

Anti-soda groups aren't ready to declare the tax a failure and say sales got a boost from unusually warm weather.

Mexico's National Institute of Public Health estimates per-capita consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages was 8% lower in 2015 than the pre-tax period of 2007 to 2013, after making adjustments including population growth and economic activity.

A World Health Organization commission recommended in January that governments tax sugar-added beverages to reduce childhood obesity, citing a joint study by Mexican health officials and the University of North Carolina. That peer- reviewed survey estimated 2014 purchases of sugary beverages dropped 6% from the average of the previous two years. It found the decline accelerated to 12% in the final month of 2014 from the previous two Decembers.

Several countries are debating special taxes on sodas including India, South Africa and the Philippines. In the U.S., Philadelphia's mayor has proposed a 3-cent-per-ounce tax on sweetened beverages.

The American Beverage Association is fighting that proposal and plans to highlight a new study that found Mexico's beverage industry lost about 3,000 jobs in the first quarter of 2014 due to the tax. The survey, conducted by the Beverage Marketing Corp., estimates Mexican soda consumption returned to pre-tax levels by mid-2015.

Even the initial downturn only lowered the average Mexican's daily caloric intake by 6 to 7 calories, or 0.2%, according to the study.

"We know these taxes don't work," said Coke Chief Executive Muhtar Kent at the company's annual shareholder meeting Wednesday, pointing to Mexico.

Governments also must spend money to raise awareness about sugar intake, require clear nutritional labels and encourage exercise, among other things, health experts say.

"The sugar tax is an important piece but not the only one," said Kelly Henning, who heads the public-health program at Bloomberg Philanthropies. Mr. Bloomberg also unsuccessfully tried to cap serving sizes of sugary drinks as mayor of New York City.

Supporters of sugary drink taxes say Mexico's levy should be higher to have a bigger impact. Senator Armando Ríos Piter wants to double the tax to offset the rising public-health cost of treating people with diabetes, a disease that disproportionately affects poor Mexicans, who buy the majority of sugary beverages.

Wilebaldo Ramírez, a 45-year-old shoe shiner in Mexico City, said he allocates about 6% of his daily wages to soda even though his wife has been pestering him to drink bottled water.

"If water was cheaper than soda, maybe I'd switch. But in the meantime I want flavor," said Mr. Ramirez, after polishing off a 600-milliliter bottle of fruit-punch-flavored Jarritos, a local soda brand.

The bottle sells for 6.50 pesos (about 37 cents) at a store near his shoe-shine stand, compared with at least 8 pesos for the same size of bottled water.

  (END) Dow Jones Newswires  05-03-16 0530ET  Copyright (c) 2016 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

[chrisinth]

No problem with this, but copious amounts of sugar are found everywhere in the food chain/diet here.

Maybe better to analyze the entire food spectrum, then address behavior modification based on education and price?

Be interesting to see if the energy drink sector gets a pass?

The problem with that is that the food chain/diet (base) hasn't really changed that much.

What has changed is the availability of the junk food/fast food & confectionery, including these soft drinks that are being targeted. (Interesting to see how the big players fight back with this).

For me, the biggest change, and this is happening all over the world folks, is that of life style of the young. The majority of the youth of today have their heads buried in their smartphones, playing games on their PC's or notebooks or wasting their intellect on social media. Their intake of food hasn't changed that much, but the burning up of that intake isn't happening as it should.

Get the kids active again and watch the obesity fade away.

The big problem for governments is that they can't tax that....................

[spidermike007]

A government completely lacking in talent, creativity, and competence, will always resort to taxes, as a solution to nearly any problem.

[syke1912]

A government completely lacking in talent, creativity, and competence, will always resort to taxes, as a solution to nearly any problem.

Taxation is an extremely effective way to reduce demand for what are believed to be harmful products.

People will consume less.

The only issue appears with the vices as increased taxation creates or proliferates a blackmarket economy.

I doubt people are going to be making batches of cola in their bathtubs.

[robblok]

No problem with this, but copious amounts of sugar are found everywhere in the food chain/diet here.

Maybe better to analyze the entire food spectrum, then address behavior modification based on education and price?

Be interesting to see if the energy drink sector gets a pass?

The problem with that is that the food chain/diet (base) hasn't really changed that much.

What has changed is the availability of the junk food/fast food & confectionery, including these soft drinks that are being targeted. (Interesting to see how the big players fight back with this).

For me, the biggest change, and this is happening all over the world folks, is that of life style of the young. The majority of the youth of today have their heads buried in their smartphones, playing games on their PC's or notebooks or wasting their intellect on social media. Their intake of food hasn't changed that much, but the burning up of that intake isn't happening as it should.

Get the kids active again and watch the obesity fade away.

The big problem for governments is that they can't tax that....................

Actually.. you cant out train (or out play) a bad diet.. so even if the kids were active it would not help because they would get too much sugar and other crap in their diet. This is a step in the right direction hopefully it will make big companies put in more healthy options because demand for the sugary crap goes down because of the price.

[Moonmoon]

At least something is being done by taxing, not giving in to big coporations that sells these drinks. It shows the government does care. 1 good thing so far.

[Moonmoon]

No problem with this, but copious amounts of sugar are found everywhere in the food chain/diet here.

Maybe better to analyze the entire food spectrum, then address behavior modification based on education and price?

Be interesting to see if the energy drink sector gets a pass?

The problem with that is that the food chain/diet (base) hasn't really changed that much.

What has changed is the availability of the junk food/fast food & confectionery, including these soft drinks that are being targeted. (Interesting to see how the big players fight back with this).

For me, the biggest change, and this is happening all over the world folks, is that of life style of the young. The majority of the youth of today have their heads buried in their smartphones, playing games on their PC's or notebooks or wasting their intellect on social media. Their intake of food hasn't changed that much, but the burning up of that intake isn't happening as it should.

Get the kids active again and watch the obesity fade away.

The big problem for governments is that they can't tax that....................

Actually.. you cant out train (or out play) a bad diet.. so even if the kids were active it would not help because they would get too much sugar and other crap in their diet. This is a step in the right direction hopefully it will make big companies put in more healthy options because demand for the sugary crap goes down because of the price.

you r absolutly right. Not of us r professional athletes that train for a living. Once u grow up n reach a certain age n u stop growing. Your metabolism drops. For a normal working person, how many hours of work does he put in in a week? For exercise n training most normal person can only put in 1 hr per day 3-4 times a week. Thats out of 168 hrs in a week. No way u can out train a diet.

Proper nutrition n diet is the way to go for health n fitness. Cutting down sugar n deep fried foods r good. One should research properly.

I was 34 last year n height 178 n weight 74 kg. Thats not fat but i was weak n flabby. I decided to research n train. Put myself on a clean diet drop my weight to 68kg n got my six pecs abs for the 1st time in my life at 34 yrs old. U don,t need to get six pec abs, it can get very strict n miserable. But u can make better choices in food n diet to help in health n fitness. Its diet 90% vs training 10% cheers

[connda]

The Coke and Pespi lobbies aren't too strong in Thailand 'eh?

[connda]

No problem with this, but copious amounts of sugar are found everywhere in the food chain/diet here.

Maybe better to analyze the entire food spectrum, then address behavior modification based on education and price?

Be interesting to see if the energy drink sector gets a pass?

The problem with that is that the food chain/diet (base) hasn't really changed that much.

What has changed is the availability of the junk food/fast food & confectionery, including these soft drinks that are being targeted. (Interesting to see how the big players fight back with this).

For me, the biggest change, and this is happening all over the world folks, is that of life style of the young. The majority of the youth of today have their heads buried in their smartphones, playing games on their PC's or notebooks or wasting their intellect on social media. Their intake of food hasn't changed that much, but the burning up of that intake isn't happening as it should.

Get the kids active again and watch the obesity fade away.

The big problem for governments is that they can't tax that....................

Actually.. you cant out train (or out play) a bad diet.. so even if the kids were active it would not help because they would get too much sugar and other crap in their diet. This is a step in the right direction hopefully it will make big companies put in more healthy options because demand for the sugary crap goes down because of the price.

I never needed big government as part of my training routine before, nor do I need big obtrusive government in my training routine now. Once they get a toe-hold, they'll want more. Your lifestyle, whatever it is, will eventually come into focus for taxation. Be careful what you wish for and endorse as 'good.' I guarantee it will bite you in the butt at at later date.

[Bigglewigs]

At least something is being done by taxing, not giving in to big coporations that sells these drinks. It shows the government does care. 1 good thing so far.

One has to wonder if it's all for health or not. Two years ago, Mexico tried this same thing adding a 10% per liter tax on sodas. There was an immediate drop in sales as expected but now here in 2016, sales have risen to almost pre tax levels and are expected to soon bypass those levels. Most of those who reduced their purchases of sugar based sodas simply replaced them with other sugar ladden foods. It's estimated that the reduction of sodas resulted in a 6.5 calorie per day decrease in the average diet. The one bright spot for the government was the 2 billion dollar increase in tax revenue. Their new strategy: Double the tax to 20%. Since the Mexico experiment, a number of other countries besides Thailand are also considering taxing sugar based soft drinks.

[scubascuba3]

At least something is being done by taxing, not giving in to big coporations that sells these drinks. It shows the government does care. 1 good thing so far.

One has to wonder if it's all for health or not. Two years ago, Mexico tried this same thing adding a 10% per liter tax on sodas. There was an immediate drop in sales as expected but now here in 2016, sales have risen to almost pre tax levels and are expected to soon bypass those levels. Most of those who reduced their purchases of sugar based sodas simply replaced them with other sugar ladden foods. It's estimated that the reduction of sodas resulted in a 6.5 calorie per day decrease in the average diet. The one bright spot for the government was the 2 billion dollar increase in tax revenue. Their new strategy: Double the tax to 20%. Since the Mexico experiment, a number of other countries besides Thailand are also considering taxing sugar based soft drinks.

You'd kinda hope that people would work out why tax is being added to drinks and become more aware of the risks. An example of evolution maybe.

[dcnx]

Just tax sugar, that's the problem.

Or, you could spend some money and get the good general, I mean PM, to spend a few minutes per week to educate the people on health and diet. At least that would be productive instead of his endless drivel.

Fruit has a lot of sugar in it

Fruit is fiberous which slows down the absorbtion of sugar. Natural sugar vs processed table sugar. Fructose vs sucrose. Natural sugar is healthy in moderation.

Processed table sugar, the crap used in sweets, candy, drinks, and so on, should be taxed heavily. That is the root of the obesity issue that is plaguing the world.

[Bigglewigs]

Just tax sugar, that's the problem.

Or, you could spend some money and get the good general, I mean PM, to spend a few minutes per week to educate the people on health and diet. At least that would be productive instead of his endless drivel.

Fruit has a lot of sugar in it

Fruit is fiberous which slows down the absorbtion of sugar. Natural sugar vs processed table sugar. Fructose vs sucrose. Natural sugar is healthy in moderation.

Processed table sugar, the crap used in sweets, candy, drinks, and so on, should be taxed heavily. That is the root of the obesity issue that is plaguing the world.

That's so true. If you were to actually look at the labels on the food in your pantry, you'd be amazed at the number of items that have added sugar in them. They put it in everything. I've been eating mayo on my sandwiches forever. Just noticed that it has added sugar. Why they need sugar in mayo makes no sense to me. It's basically just oil and eggs.

Edited May 4, 2016 by Bigglewigs

[balo]

Actually this is a good idea , the same thing happened in my home country to try to reduce the sugar consumption. Thais can not think for themselves so better to just increase the prices , maybe they will think twice when the sugar free drink is 25% cheaper,