VVD, D66, CDA and CU want to make ‘binding agreements with the industry about healthier foods’. It all still needs to be worked out, but in short it has been promised: “We will increase the tax on sugary drinks. We will consider how we can introduce a sugar tax in the long term and reduce the VAT on fruit and vegetables to zero percent.”
It doesn’t get any more concrete than that, but these short sentences generate enthusiasm at the Nutrition Center, which provides information about food and nutrition. “The combination of making sugary products such as soft drinks more expensive and making healthy food cheaper is the best. The bigger the discrepancy, the better,” says Liesbeth Velema, an expert on nutrition and behaviour.
50 percent is overweight
People have been calling for years to do something about obesity. Fifty percent of the Dutch are overweight. The government wants to reduce this percentage to 38 percent by 2040.
Weight loss has become even more urgent due to the corona crisis. Health problems mainly occur in people who are overweight. A large part of the healthcare costs is also linked to an unhealthy lifestyle.
In 2018, the government signed the National Prevention Agreement, which contains more than 200 agreements and targets. “This political decision can contribute to that”, Velema explains.
Scientific evidence
And the measure – although it depends on how it is implemented – will certainly have an effect. “There is enough scientific evidence that it can be an effective means of reducing sugar consumption.”
That evidence comes from many other countries that have already introduced a sugar tax – or some form of it. In Mexico, South Africa, Chile, the Philippines, and also closer to home: the United Kingdom, France and Norway.
Last year, the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) concluded after an analysis: sales of taxed soft drinks are decreasing. More healthier alternatives are sold in the United Kingdom and Norway. And in the UK, factories have adapted their recipes as a result of the measure.
And the latter is also a profit, says Velema. “People can still buy their coke there, but with much less sugar than here in the Netherlands.”
The effect of the sugar tax depends on many factors, such as its amount, the availability of alternative foods, the relative price of food, a person’s spending habits and other changes in the cost of living. “So we always have to wait and see. But at least the government is already sending a good signal.”
How much more expensive must soft drinks and juice become to really see the effect of the measure? “In theory, a price increase of 10 percent can already lead to a sales decrease of 9 to 13 percent. And if you go a little further, about a 20 percent price increase, you see an even stronger effect. People then really choose less sugary drinks.”
Foodwatch: action at last
Food watchdog foodwatch is also pleased with the intention to introduce a sugar tax. “Consumers have been calling for measures to tackle the unhealthy food industry for years. Experience has often shown that voluntary agreements with the food industry do not work.”
Foodwatch is pleased that the government is ‘finally taking effective action’. “The shelves are full of unhealthy soft drinks, healthy food is often more expensive than unhealthy and children are inundated with advertising for junk food,” says the consumer organization.