They have changed their minds: deputies on Monday finally approved, after having rejected it, a reform of the “soda tax”, aimed at limiting the quantity of sugars in this type of drinks, as part of the first reading examination of the Social Security Budget .
The social affairs committee asked Monday evening for a second deliberation on an amendment by the socialist Jérôme Guedj that the National Assembly had rejected in the morning.
It was approved with 142 votes in favor and 100 against. The Insoumi, who had abstained on Monday morning, voted in favor of Jérôme Guedj’s amendment, joining those of the rest of the left, MoDem and Horizons. The deputies of the LR and the Ensemble pour la République (EPR, ex-Renaissance) are divided.
This amendment, sub-amended by general rapporteur Yannick Neuder (LR), plans to reform the tax on carbonated soft drinks by creating three tax brackets, instead of sixteen, inspired by the British model.
Reduce sugar consumption
The British tax “made it possible to reduce the percentage of drinks above the first threshold (5 g/ml) by 40% and the total reduction in sugar consumption would be estimated at 30 g per family per week, i.e. an effect four times higher than the French tax”, explains the justification for the amendment.
Health Minister Geneviève Darrieussecq (MoDem) supported the amendment as did her predecessor Frédéric Valletoux (Horizons). Former Consumer Affairs Minister and EPR MP Olivia Grégoire opposed it, highlighting a possible transfer of the tax to the price paid by the consumer.
MEPs also adopted an amendment by ecologist Sabrina Sebaihi, aimed at introducing a tax on added sugars in processed foods, against government advice.
Mention of Nutri-Score in advertisements
The Assembly also approved the obligation for food manufacturers to mention the Nutri score of their products in their advertising. Those who do not respect this constraint will have to pay a “contribution” to Social Security, equal to 5% of their advertising budget.
Exceptionally, products benefiting from an AOP, PGI, red label or other “mountain products” designation will not be affected by this obligation, to avoid negative exposure from which most cheeses in particular would suffer.
MEPs also voted in favor of a tax on hearing aid advertising (to discourage “excessive and misleading advertising practices” which lead to “unsuitable purchases”), as well as a system aimed at lowering the costs of supplementary health insurance for pensioners, unemployed or unemployed youth.
Time.news Interview with Public Health Expert Dr. Sophia Marceau on the Recent “Soda Tax” Reform
Time.news Editor: Good day, everyone! Today, we’re diving into a hot topic on public health and economic reform: the recent reversal in the French National Assembly regarding the “soda tax.” Joining me is Dr. Sophia Marceau, an expert in public health policy. Welcome, Dr. Marceau!
Dr. Marceau: Thank you for having me! It’s a pleasure to be here.
Editor: Let’s get right into it. The National Assembly has approved a reform of the soda tax that aims to limit sugar consumption. This came after a prior rejection. What do you think prompted this change of heart among deputies?
Dr. Marceau: It seems that there were several factors at play. The increased awareness of obesity and related health issues, particularly among children, has been a significant concern. Additionally, the success of similar measures in other countries, like the UK, likely provided a compelling argument for reform. The initial rejection might have been influenced by resistance from various political factions, but the subsequent support indicates a shift towards prioritizing public health.
Editor: Speaking of the UK’s model, this new reform reduces the number of tax brackets from sixteen to three. How effective do you think this simplification will be in reducing sugar consumption?
Dr. Marceau: Simplifying the tax structure is a strategic move. With fewer brackets, it becomes clearer for consumers and manufacturers what is taxed, which can lead to more straightforward compliance. Evidence from the UK suggests that their tax structure significantly reduced the number of high-sugar drinks available on the market—up to a 40% reduction. If the French reform can achieve even a fraction of that impact, it could be quite beneficial for public health.
Editor: The study you mentioned highlights a potential decrease in sugar consumption of about 30 grams per week per family. How does that translate to broader public health outcomes?
Dr. Marceau: Every small reduction counts, especially when translated across a population. If we consider 30 grams less sugar per family each week—over a year, that’s quite substantial. Reducing sugar intake can lead to lower incidences of obesity, diabetes, and other lifestyle-related diseases. Ultimately, this can result in decreased healthcare costs and increased quality of life, making a potent case for the reform.
Editor: There was a notable bipartisan effort in favor of the reform, alongside mixed responses from the Republican party. How do you view the political dynamics surrounding such public health policies?
Dr. Marceau: Public health issues often transcend political lines, as they affect everyone. This reform has support across various parties, indicating that many legislators understand the value of pursuing health-oriented legislation. However, it’s also telling that there’s division within parties, especially among conservatives. This reflects the traditional trade-offs between economic interests and public health priorities. As health experts, we always advocate for policies that prioritize well-being over corporate profits, which can sometimes lead to friction in the political arena.
Editor: Looking ahead, what challenges do you foresee in the implementation of this reform?
Dr. Marceau: One major challenge is ensuring that the tax is effectively enforced and that there’s transparency in reporting. Manufacturers may attempt to navigate around the tax, and we must remain vigilant about loopholes. Additionally, public acceptance and awareness are crucial. Many consumers are unaware of the health risks associated with excessive sugar intake, so educational efforts will be vital in tandem with the reform.
Editor: For our final question, what message would you like to convey to our readers regarding the importance of this tax reform?
Dr. Marceau: I would encourage everyone to view this reform not just as a tax adjustment, but as a proactive step towards a healthier society. Public health initiatives like these require public backing to succeed, and individual choices can amplify their impact. By supporting healthy policies, we are collectively working towards a healthier future for ourselves and the generations to come.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Marceau, for your insights and expertise! This has been a fascinating discussion about the potential impact of the soda tax reform.
Dr. Marceau: Thank you for the opportunity! I look forward to continuing the conversation around public health.
Editor: Absolutely! Stay tuned for more updates on this topic and others in public health.