Essay Sample: Should Fast Foods or Unhealthy Foods Be Heavily Taxed?

Over the recent decades, concerns have risen over the risks of fast foods on American consumers. These foods are laced with high amounts of sugar and salt which make them a health risk when consumed in a manner that is not regulated. Their easy access has made it more an attractive option for most consumers. As a result, many Americans especially young people have developed diet-related problems such as obesity. Obese individuals often become vulnerable to life-threatening conditions like blood pressure, heart diseases, and diabetes, among others. Due to the mentioned effects, some medical professionals and researchers have suggested that imposition of a hefty tax (like in the case of cigarettes) on fast foods would reduce the health risks associated with such foods.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Health institutions and health academics have proposed that a tax increase is an effective tool of discouraging the consumption of certain products that have been proved to be harmful to human health. This tool operates on the premise that cost and pricing are critical in influencing consumption patterns (Moolgavkar et al., 541-44). The element of cost is what drives consumers to prefer some products than others. As Franck et al. explain, the inexpensiveness of unhealthy foods relative to fresh produce is thought to be an important contributor to the overconsumption of junk food (1949). Basically, the affordability of unhealthy foods increases access by consumers. From this perspective, researchers and policy makers theorize that, by raising the taxes levied on unhealthy foods, the cost element would push consumers to reject cheap, heavy-energy foods for fresh products (1949).On a similar note, the money obtained can be used to offer subsidies to business entities that specialize in the production of vegetables and fruits (Brownell and Shughart Wall Street Journal.com). These measures would make healthy foods less expensive hence people would consume them and disregard energy-dense foods.

But how does price or cost actually affect consumption? Imposing heavy taxes on fast foods is expected to discourage consumption through price elasticity. Franck et al. describe price elasticity as the degree to which the overall demand for a particular good responds towards a unit change in its price (1949). However, it should be noted that the price of other commodities is crucial in determining the extent to which consumers shift to certain goods in reaction to a change in price. This caution results from the fact that demand for foods is a function of price and other factors such as income levels, the price of related items, advertising, and other factors that impact on consumers preferences (Franck et al.1949).

Levying of heavy taxes increases the cost of manufacturing which forces the stakeholders in the fast food goods industry to pass the cost on to their customers. The increase in price often affects the profit margins of businesses. This reverse adverse effect is expected to encourage food companies to produce fresh goods (Frank et., 1949).As a result, fewer fast food products would be available in the market.

The cost of obesity and other diet-related illness is so huge that action needs to be taken in the form of taxes to ensure that the health and future of the next generation are protected. According to Frank et al., the cost of treating people with obesity and its associated conditions is estimated to be at least $ 147 billion each year. In the same breadth, obesity costs also affect the workplace, where decreased productivity and increased absenteeism affect the large-scale functioning of society (1951). Obese persons may also experience other health complications which require a further financial commitment by the affected individuals and the state.

Another reason that may necessitate the imposition of heavy taxes on unhealthy foods is to raise revenue that caters for other interventions that help modify behaviors. Apart from spending the money collected from the taxes on medical bills, the government can also channel these resources to childhood education and other initiatives that sensitize people on the dangers of overconsumption of fast foods. These initiatives can target low-income individuals who are the most vulnerable groups in the society (Moolgavkar et al., 541-48). Although opponents of heavy taxation argue that the move would hurt the lives of poor individuals, evidence suggests that benefits far outweigh the costs. This is the case, especially when considering that this group has the highest tendency to react to changes in prices, hence considered more likely to stop from consuming unhealthy foods if prices rise beyond their financial reach (Brownell and Shughart Wall Street Journal.com). As a result, more cases of obesity would be averted among poor groups compared to wealthy persons who would feel little impact of heavy taxation.

To illustrate the effectiveness of taxation, scholars have highlighted the impact of taxes on the reduction of tobacco smoking rates in the United States. For instance, about 795851 lung cancer deaths were avoided in the period between 1975 and 2000. About 70218 lung cancer deaths were averted in the year 2000 alone (Moolgavkar et al., 541).This shows that taxes have an effect of discouraging consumption of unhealthy products thereby reducing the number persons addicted to fast foods.

Despite the enormous potential of heavy taxation in reducing cases of obesity, scholars and opponents have highlighted various weaknesses that may hinder the effectiveness of this strategy. As pointed earlier, price alone does not determine the choices and preferences of consumers. As such, heavy taxes may be imposed but fail to discourage some groups from reducing their consumption of certain foods. For instance, this strategy may not be effective in discouraging rich groups (characteristic of most American consumers) from excessive consumption of energy-dense products (Frank et al., 1949-50).It then follows that taxation must be complemented with other measures for meaningful benefits to be realized.

Taxation also fails to recognize that addiction plays a significant role in influencing people to consume foods laced with high levels of salt and sugar. For this reason, these consumers would not hesitate to devise other ways of accessing such foods should taxation price them out. For instance, heavy taxation of tobacco products has led to the emergence of black market cells that sell cigarettes at an affordable price in New York City (Brownell and Shughart Wall Street Journal.com).

The consumer may also use other ways to circumvent the effects of price increases. According to Brownell and Shughart, the development of black markets is not the only way that people skirt high taxes. When a product becomes more expensive in one area, they simply go across the border and buy it in a neighboring spot where its cheaper(1-2).This explains the reasons as to why retailers in California initially decided not pass such levies on to the consumers for fear of loss of customers to neighboring cities. Elsewhere, similar measures have failed to yield substantial results. In 2011, Denmark passed a similar law, but consumers found a way of dealing with the high cost of fat foods by moving across the border to Sweden and Germany where they purchased these food items at a much lower price (Frank et al., 1949). So, is it possible for such laws to be effective in circumstances where neighboring nations or states do not support them? Evidence shows that this move is not feasible if neighboring countries do not have such laws in place.

The one-sided focus on fast foods as the cause of obesity should be discarded so as to design comprehensive approaches of combating the condition and its related illnesses. For instance, policymakers must recognize that metabolic and genetic factors play a role in predisposing individuals to the development of obesity. Also, inadequate physical exercises render the body incapable of moderating the levels of sugar in the body (Sahadi CNNmoney.com). As such, any policy proposal must take these factors into consideration as tax alone cannot achieve any meaningful results.

In conclusion, heavy taxes have been an effective tool of discouraging the consumption of certain products which are considered a healthy risk to the public. The result of this strategy is evident in the success taxation policies have recorded in averting lung cancer deaths in the United States. However, these measures should be complemented with other strategies for them to be effective. This position results from the fact that consumers would always find a way of circumventing the increased costs of goods. Notably, some may decide to make purchases across the borders or buy such goods from black markets. Therefore, it would be myopic to imagine that taxation would be a cure-it-all strategy that should be implemented on a stand-alone basis.

Works Cited

Brownell, Kelly, and William Shughart II. "Should There Be a Tax on Soda and Other Sugary Drinks?" The Wall Street journal, 12 July 2015,

Franck, Caroline, et al. "Taxing Junk Food to Counter Obesity." American Journal of Public Health, vol. 103, no. 11, 2013, pp. 1949-1953.

Moolgavkar, S. H., et al. "Impact of Reduced Tobacco Smoking on Lung Cancer Mortality in the United States During 1975-2000." JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 104, no. 7, 2012, pp. 541-548, doi:10.1093/jnci/djs136.

Joanne Sahadi. Should there be a fat tax on soda and junk food?" CNN money, CNN, 14 Dec. 2015.