PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Estimate the impact of 20 % flat-rate and tiered sugary drink tax structures on the consumption of sugary drinks, sugar-sweetened beverages and 100 % juice by age, sex and socio-economic position.
METHODS: We modelled the impact of price changes - for each tax structure - on the demand for sugary drinks by applying own- and cross-price elasticities to self-report sugary drink consumption measured using single-day 24-h dietary recalls from the cross-sectional, nationally representative 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey-Nutrition. For both 20 % flat-rate and tiered sugary drink tax scenarios, we used linear regression to estimate differences in mean energy intake and proportion of energy intake from sugary drinks by age, sex, education, food security and income.
METHODS: Canada.
METHODS: 19 742 respondents aged 2 and over.
RESULTS: In the 20 % flat-rate scenario, we estimated mean energy intake and proportion of daily energy intake from sugary drinks on a given day would be reduced by 29 kcal/d (95 % UI: 18, 41) and 1·3 % (95 % UI: 0·8, 1·8), respectively. Similarly, in the tiered tax scenario, additional small, but meaningful reductions were estimated in mean energy intake (40 kcal/d, 95 % UI: 24, 55) and proportion of daily energy intake (1·8 %, 95 % UI: 1·1, 2·5). Both tax structures reduced, but did not eliminate, inequities in mean energy intake from sugary drinks despite larger consumption reductions in children/adolescents, males and individuals with lower education, food security and income.
CONCLUSIONS: Sugary drink taxation, including the additional benefit of taxing 100 % juice, could reduce overall and inequities in mean energy intake from sugary drinks in Canada.
METHODS: We modelled the impact of price changes - for each tax structure - on the demand for sugary drinks by applying own- and cross-price elasticities to self-report sugary drink consumption measured using single-day 24-h dietary recalls from the cross-sectional, nationally representative 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey-Nutrition. For both 20 % flat-rate and tiered sugary drink tax scenarios, we used linear regression to estimate differences in mean energy intake and proportion of energy intake from sugary drinks by age, sex, education, food security and income.
METHODS: Canada.
METHODS: 19 742 respondents aged 2 and over.
RESULTS: In the 20 % flat-rate scenario, we estimated mean energy intake and proportion of daily energy intake from sugary drinks on a given day would be reduced by 29 kcal/d (95 % UI: 18, 41) and 1·3 % (95 % UI: 0·8, 1·8), respectively. Similarly, in the tiered tax scenario, additional small, but meaningful reductions were estimated in mean energy intake (40 kcal/d, 95 % UI: 24, 55) and proportion of daily energy intake (1·8 %, 95 % UI: 1·1, 2·5). Both tax structures reduced, but did not eliminate, inequities in mean energy intake from sugary drinks despite larger consumption reductions in children/adolescents, males and individuals with lower education, food security and income.
CONCLUSIONS: Sugary drink taxation, including the additional benefit of taxing 100 % juice, could reduce overall and inequities in mean energy intake from sugary drinks in Canada.
摘要：
目标：估计20%统一税率和分级含糖饮料税结构对含糖饮料消费的影响，含糖饮料,100%按年龄计算的果汁，性别,和社会经济地位。
方法：我们模拟了价格变化对含糖饮料需求的影响，方法是将自己的价格弹性和交叉价格弹性应用于自我报告含糖饮料消费，使用单日24小时饮食回顾从横截面进行测量，全国代表性的2015年加拿大社区健康调查-营养。对于20%的统一税率和分层含糖饮料税方案，我们使用线性回归来估计不同年龄含糖饮料的平均能量摄入和能量摄入比例的差异，性别,教育,粮食安全和收入。
方法：加拿大。
方法：19,742名2岁及以上的受访者。
结果：在20%的固定费率方案中，我们估计，在某一天，含糖饮料的平均能量摄入和每日能量摄入比例将减少29千卡/天（95％UI：18，41）和1.3％（95％UI：0.8，1.8），分别。同样，在分级税收方案中，额外的小,但估计平均能量摄入量有意义的减少(40千卡/天，95%UI：24、55）和每日能量摄入比例（1.8%，95%UI：1.1、2.5）。两种税收结构都减少了，但并没有消除，尽管儿童/青少年的消费减少幅度更大，但含糖饮料的平均能量摄入不平等，男性和受教育程度较低的人，粮食安全和收入。
结论：含糖饮料税，包括对100%果汁征税的额外好处，可以减少加拿大含糖饮料平均能量摄入的总体和不平等。
方法：我们模拟了价格变化对含糖饮料需求的影响，方法是将自己的价格弹性和交叉价格弹性应用于自我报告含糖饮料消费，使用单日24小时饮食回顾从横截面进行测量，全国代表性的2015年加拿大社区健康调查-营养。对于20%的统一税率和分层含糖饮料税方案，我们使用线性回归来估计不同年龄含糖饮料的平均能量摄入和能量摄入比例的差异，性别,教育,粮食安全和收入。
方法：加拿大。
方法：19,742名2岁及以上的受访者。
结果：在20%的固定费率方案中，我们估计，在某一天，含糖饮料的平均能量摄入和每日能量摄入比例将减少29千卡/天（95％UI：18，41）和1.3％（95％UI：0.8，1.8），分别。同样，在分级税收方案中，额外的小,但估计平均能量摄入量有意义的减少(40千卡/天，95%UI：24、55）和每日能量摄入比例（1.8%，95%UI：1.1、2.5）。两种税收结构都减少了，但并没有消除，尽管儿童/青少年的消费减少幅度更大，但含糖饮料的平均能量摄入不平等，男性和受教育程度较低的人，粮食安全和收入。
结论：含糖饮料税，包括对100%果汁征税的额外好处，可以减少加拿大含糖饮料平均能量摄入的总体和不平等。
