The “pioneer” of sugar tax on soft drinks has come into force in the united kingdom.
From Friday, the manufacturers have to pay a tax on the high sugar content of drinks sold.
The ministers and activists believe has already proven to be a success, with many firms reducing sugar content ahead of the change. But others say that it is still too early to judge the impact.
Major brands such as Fanta, Ribena and Lucozade, has reduced the sugar content of the drinks, but Coca-Cola does not have.
The introduction of the rate means that the uk joins a small handful of countries, including Mexico, France and Norway, which have introduced similar taxes.
Teens consume huge amounts of sugar in drinks
All age groups are excessive consumption of sugar, with teens, the worst of the offenders.
They get a quarter of their consumption of sugar from soft drinks.
Minister of public Health, Steve Brine, said: “Our teenagers eat almost a tub of sugar-sweetened beverages each year, on average, to feed a worrying trend of obesity.
“The tax is an innovative policy that will help reduce the intake of sugar.”
Public health England will also hope that it will improve the oral health of the children.
Coinciding with the introduction of the fee, the agency released figures that show a child in England has a tooth removed in the hospital every 10 minutes due to preventable decay.
PHE Dr Sandra White said: “it Is sad to see so many children admitted to hospital with tooth decay.”
She is urging families to skip soft drinks altogether and to consume water and lower fat content of the milk.
Sugar tax is already yielding results
What happens to the sugar tax money?
Young people ‘for more sugar tax boost’
Why the sugar and the alcohol’s about to get more expensive?
How the industry has reacted?
Estimates by the Treasury, based on market data suggest that 50% of manufacturers have reduced the sugar content of their drinks.
Fanta has been cut by nearly a third, and Ribena Irn-Bru in half and Lucozade in almost two-thirds.
Tesco has said nothing of his own brand of drinks is going to fall foul of the collection, although the process of reformulation began before the sugar tax was announced.
Head of soft drinks Phil Banks, believes that approximately 85% of the products purchased in the shops of the company will be below the rate threshold.
“At Tesco, things will not be very different,” he said.
But he admitted that the customers can see some of the brands of drinks each time more expensive, or the one that is served in small bowls.
Earlier this year, Coca-Cola has announced that it will reduce the size of your 1.75 l 1.5 l bottle and put the price by 20p.
The company said it had decided not to change its classic recipe because “people love the taste and they have told us not to change.”
Coca-Cola Zero Sugar and Coca-cola light are not affected by the tax.How will it work?
The tax applies to the manufacturers, if it is transmitted to consumers or not, is a thing of them.
Drinks with 5 g of sugar per 100 ml face a lower tax rate, 18p per litre.
Those with more than 8 g per 100 ml are facing a higher rate, 24p per litre.
Pure fruit juices will be exempt as will not carry any added sugar, while beverages with a high milk content will also be exempt due to their calcium content.
Originally, the Treasury forecast it would raise more than £500 m a year, but that has now been reduced to £240 million, because the sugar of the reduction of the manufacturers.
In England the revenues to be invested in school sports and breakfast clubs.”Too much stick, not enough carrot”
But will it work? The jury is still out.
The university of Bedfordshire, an expert in nutrition, Dr. Daniel Bailey has said that while the tax is a “positive step” in the fight against obesity and had led to a “remarkable” reaction from the industry, the response by consumers is uncertain.
“The increase of the tax placed on soft drinks will do that the more expensive products, but this actually discourage people from buying them?
“We could just end up with consumers buying the same amount but paying more.”
The survey suggests that this may be the case for many people.
Research from Mintel that found under half of Britons say taxing unhealthy products would encourage them to re-cut.
By comparison more easy-to-understand nutritional information to alter the buying habits of three-quarters of the people, the survey of 2,000 people showed.
Mintel associate director of the food and drink Emma Clifford said that suggested “carrot” instead of “stick” may be a better approach.
Read more of Nick
Follow Nick on Twitter