Denmark is set to introduce a tax on food high in saturated fat.

• OneBuckeye

  

  http://www.just-food.com/analysis/denmarks-saturated-fat-tax-provokes-industry-anger_id115300.aspx
  

  Denmark is set to introduce a tax on food high in saturated fat. The levy, the Danish government claims, will improve the health of the population. The food sector has hit back, questioning that rationale and arguing that consumers will travel to neighbouring countries to buy the affected foods anyway. And, as Gerard O'Dwyer reports, the EU could rule that the tax breaks free trade rules.
  
  The Danish government has turned its face against a storm of criticism with its plans to proceed with the implementation of a controversial saturated food fat tax.
  
  Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen's centre-right administration plans to bring in the levy in October despite widespread opposition from Denmark's food industry.
  
  The tax applies to meats, including chicken and pork, cheese, butter, edible vegetable oil, margarine and other foods such as potato-based snacks. The tax, imposed on domestic and imported food, is levied on the weight of saturated fat contained in these foods, and charged at the rate of DKK13.50 per kg of saturated fat.
  
  However, the legal and commercial basis for the tax could end up before the European Court of Justice, following objections lodged by Margarine Foreningen (MIFU), Denmark's central association of margarine producers.
  
  "We have filed our complaint with the EU Commission. We consider it to be confusing, unfair, unwieldy and unwarranted," says Mogens Nielsen, MIFU's president.
  
  That criticism is rejected by the taxation ministry. It holds that the new legislation, which has been altered on several occasions since it was first proposed in 2008, will have a positive effect on helping Danish consumers make better and healthier food choices.
  
  "There has been a significant consultation around the new legislation, and broad input from many different industry and scientific quarters. We see no reason to amend it before it is introduced," claims taxation minister Peter Christensen.
  
  The tax was presented to the Folketing, Denmark's national parliament, in January by Christensen's predecessor Troels Lund Poulsen. Christensen took over at the ministry after a mini-Cabinet re-shuffle in March. The Folketing approved the tax law last month.
  
  The law has been roundly criticised. The Danish Chamber of Commerce (DCC) estimates that the actual impact of the fat tax on shop prices could see the price for double cream increase by up to 15% to DKK10. A 200g carton of butter could rise by 12% to DKK17, while the price for half a kilo of cheese with a fat content of 45% is expected to climb by 8% to DKK40.
  
  Research conducted by the Confederation of Danish Industry (CDI) since 2008 concludes that sugared and salted foods produced domestically, or imported and distributed, is the already the most taxed of any EU member state.
  
  CDI research estimates that the cumulative impact of the existing taxes on confectionery and beverages and the planned saturated fat tax will add over 30% to the retail cost of foods in the affected categories, adjusted for inflation, compared to 2007 prices.
  
  "The proposed new tax could spur more Danes to travel across the border to shop. The principal argument to introduce the new taxes is based on health, but one can wonder if it will have the desired effect when the price differential in price on confectionery and beverages between our neighbours Germany and Sweden and ourselves widens even further," says Ole Linnet Juul, director of Fodevarer, the Danish food and drinks federation.
  
  The DCC agrees, noting the DKK10bn Danes already spend each year on cross-border shopping for foods, beverages and other items will grow further on the back of the new fat tax.
  
  "The tax will make Danish foods, and foods sold in Denmark, much less competitive," Mette Feifer, an economics consultant to the DCC, says. This will reduce spending in Danish stores and negatively affect public revenues. Cross-border shopping is now a social problem in Denmark. The fat tax will encourage Danes to buy more butter, meat, and other foods south of the border in Germany."
  
  Meanwhile, Mejeriforeningen, the country's dairy board, which has members including Arla Foods and Fayrefield Foods, questions the Government's health-based rationale for launching the fat tax.
  
  "The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition contends that there is no correlation between intake of saturated fats and cardiovascular diseases. The tax penalises people, such as the elderly and children, who have high nutritional needs," claims Mejeriforeningen policy director Kirsten Holm Svendsen.
  
  She agreed more cross-border trade would be fuelled, especially in "cheaper" neighbouring states like Germany "where products such as butter are already some 35 percent less expensive that in Denmark".
  
  However, while broadly unpopular in Denmark, the tax is unlikely to be a unique piece of legislation in Europe for long. Finland announced earlier this month that its National Nutrition Council supports a tax modelled on Denmark's levy on food high in saturated fat. The NCC is the expert body under Finland's ministry of agriculture and forestry. Sweden and Norway have also been examining establishing a similar tax since 2007.
  
  "As a country we need to do more to promote healthier foods and diets. What Denmark plans to do interests us. During recent years Finland and Denmark have introduced taxes on sugared products such as soft drinks, ice cream and chocolate. A saturated fat tax is a logical next step," says Jyrki Katainen, Finland's finance minister.
  
  But first, Denmark's new tax has still to be vetted by the EU and Mejeri hopes the Danish government will postpone implementation at least until the European Commission pronounces on whether it thinks the tax complies with EU free trade rules. This could happen next year, with the European Commission yet to comprehensively study the tax, notes Rodrigo Peduzzi, from the Commission’s industrial policy unit.
  
  If the EU rules the tax contravenes EU rules, Mejeriforeningen's Svendsen says the Danish government faces a possible court case with Brussels. "This could lead to the claw back of monies paid in taxes," she says.
  
  And that could be expensive. The taxation ministry estimates that the Government will raise DKK1.5bn annually from the fat tax. Similar taxes on confectionery and soft drinks introduced between 2008 and 2010 already generate an annual tax intake of DKK1bn.
  

• I Am Ahab

  I like it. But don't tax meats and cheeses/ dairy since those are necessary, in moderation, for good health. Tax junk food tho. Just like cigs.
  
  Just saying it's something to consider.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  "I like it. But don't tax meats and cheeses/ dairy since those are necessary, in moderation, for good health"
  
  One can live a completely healthy life without meat and cheese...particuarly cheese. If one's going to be judgmental about what other's eat, they should open themselves up to the same criticism.
• BR1986FB

  They should target the processed shit.
• tk421

  

  How about people take responsibility for what they eat instead of governments treating everyone like brain dead morons? Jesus fucking christ, I hate this shit. Pretty soon you won't be able to buy anything except lettuce.
• Automatik

  

  This is weird. I always figured as a whole the Danish population was rather healthy. I spent a decent amount of time there and seeing an overweight person was rare, and I can't ever recall seeing anyone who was extremely obese.
  
  Fwiw their junk food selection is shit compared to the great USA!!
• sleeper

  

  As long as they don't touch cheese in the US, I'll be alright.
• bigdaddy2003

  

  tk421;777772 wrote:How about people take responsibility for what they eat instead of governments treating everyone like brain dead morons? Jesus fucking christ, I hate this shit. Pretty soon you won't be able to buy anything except lettuce.

  
  This.
• Pick6

  

  tk421;777772 wrote:How about people take responsibility for what they eat instead of governments treating everyone like brain dead morons? Jesus fucking christ, I hate this shit. Pretty soon you won't be able to buy anything except lettuce.

  
  a lot of people are brain dead morons...
• The Boss

  

  Socialism at it's finest. SMH @ any American who would be alright with this happening here.
• tk421

  

  The Boss;777853 wrote:Socialism at it's finest. SMH @ any American who would be alright with this happening here.

  
  
  Apparently people in NYC are fine with it.
• The Boss

  

  tk421;777869 wrote:Apparently people in NYC are fine with it.

  
  SHOCKER
• Automatik

  

  I like the involvement we have here with schools and a healthier diet, but fucking with the general public is stupid.
• Automatik

  

  tk421;777869 wrote:Apparently people in NYC are fine with it.

  
  News to me? Everything is expensive here so I guess I haven't noticed.
• The Boss

  

  What most people don't seem to realize is that this, just like any law against drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, etc., is an infringement on your rights. The government should absolutely not be able to tell you what you can or can't do/put into your own body. The more you let them take the more they will take--and it's one of the biggest reasons I hate government run health care. A healthy citizen is cheaper, therefore they're going to do all they can do to take these things away from you. Now, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with being health, I'm just all for freedom and the person's right to choose. I don't think the government has any right to tell you what you can do with your own body.
• Automatik

  

  The Boss;777877 wrote:What most people don't seem to realize is that this, just like any law against drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, etc., is an infringement on your rights. The government should absolutely not be able to tell you what you can or can't do/put into your own body. The more you let them take the more they will take--and it's one of the biggest reasons I hate government run health care. A healthy citizen is cheaper, therefore they're going to do all they can do to take these things away from you. Now, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with being health, I'm just all for freedom and the person's right to choose. I don't think the government has any right to tell you what you can do with your own body.

  
  In the US yes I agree....Denmark not so much. They have their own set of rules, which from my experience works very well....for a population of like 6 million. Here? Fuckkkkkk no.
• The Boss

  

  Yeah, I don't care about Denmark. I just worry about the people here who like this kind of stuff--they're the reason that the government gets away with the things it does, because they're naive. They read something and say, "yeahhhh, that sounds wonderful--more healthy people, fewer fat people", instead of what they should be saying, "ugh, more government, fewer rights". And they'll take all the rope we give them.
• sleeper

  

  The Boss;777877 wrote:What most people don't seem to realize is that this, just like any law against drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, etc., is an infringement on your rights. The government should absolutely not be able to tell you what you can or can't do/put into your own body. The more you let them take the more they will take--and it's one of the biggest reasons I hate government run health care. A healthy citizen is cheaper, therefore they're going to do all they can do to take these things away from you. Now, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with being health, I'm just all for freedom and the person's right to choose. I don't think the government has any right to tell you what you can do with your own body.

  
  I agree with the bolded section 99%.
  
  However, this isn't banning unhealthy food, this is simple addressing the negative externality of unhealthy people being more expensive to their healthcare system. This is no different than discouraging people from smoking by making them pay more tax.
• O-Trap

  

  ccrunner609;777927 wrote:
  
  
  
  BTW, this chick is fucking hot.

  
  She looks 16.
  
  Legal in Ohio, for what it's worth.
• The Boss

  

  sleeper;777913 wrote:I agree with the bolded section 99%.
  
  However, this isn't banning unhealthy food, this is simple addressing the negative externality of unhealthy people being more expensive to their healthcare system. This is no different than discouraging people from smoking by making them pay more tax.

  
  Yeah, I know, I think I pretty well covered that point in the post you quoted.
• I Am Ahab

  Manhattan Buckeye;777345 wrote:"I like it. But don't tax meats and cheeses/ dairy since those are necessary, in moderation, for good health"
  
  One can live a completely healthy life without meat and cheese...particuarly cheese. If one's going to be judgmental about what other's eat, they should open themselves up to the same criticism.

  I disagree to an extent. I abstained from any kind of meat including fish and rarely ate dairy for nearly 15 yrs and I feel that my diet is more complete since I've introduced those back into my diet. It is possible to get all the vitamins and other nutrients on a vegan but it requires a lot of effort. Easier to just eat meat and dairy.
• I Wear Pants

  The Boss;777877 wrote:What most people don't seem to realize is that this, just like any law against drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, etc., is an infringement on your rights. The government should absolutely not be able to tell you what you can or can't do/put into your own body. The more you let them take the more they will take--and it's one of the biggest reasons I hate government run health care. A healthy citizen is cheaper, therefore they're going to do all they can do to take these things away from you. Now, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with being health, I'm just all for freedom and the person's right to choose. I don't think the government has any right to tell you what you can do with your own body.

  While I agree about being able to do what you will with your body I disagree that any tax on those items is necessarily an infringement of rights. Outright banning? Absolutely. But putting a tax of things like cigarettes, booze, weed, or burgers fried in lard wrapped with bacon covered in sauce then battered and fried in fatback isn't a per se infringement IMO. It could be when it becomes outlandishly high or complex but whatever.
• redstreak one

  

  Why cant governments work in the opposite direction, give tax breaks and incentives to be healthy? Go to the doctor 1 time a year, get blood work done, have a physical and use the report to give people an incentive to do whats healthy for you. I never understood this, people respond to positive reinforcement. I may not live the perfect healthy lifestyle, but I exercise daily, watch what I eat and indulge in a few vices a couple times a week! lol
• queencitybuckeye

  redstreak one;778497 wrote: I never understood this, people respond to positive reinforcement.

  
  People respond to incentives, both positive and negative. The carrot or the stick alone is less effective than a mix of both.
  
  That said, neither is a proper role of government in this context, IMO.
• The Boss

  

  redstreak one;778497 wrote:Why cant governments work in the opposite direction, give tax breaks and incentives to be healthy? Go to the doctor 1 time a year, get blood work done, have a physical and use the report to give people an incentive to do whats healthy for you. I never understood this, people respond to positive reinforcement. I may not live the perfect healthy lifestyle, but I exercise daily, watch what I eat and indulge in a few vices a couple times a week! lol

  
  Because that would make too much sense. If they are going to have a role in any way, this should be it. But I still don't believe that they should have a say one way or the other.