Taxes do not improve public health, yet governments can’t seem to move past this tired, old idea. National Review contributing editor Andrew Stuttaford says the latest ill-considered attempt – this time by the United Kingdom – to tax every day beverages is “regressive, reasonably complicated to administer (more bureaucrats!), and is unlikely to achieve its stated goal.”

Stuttaford says that according to Christopher Snowdon of the Institute of Economic Affairs in Britain, the tax will cost taxpayers a hefty £20 billion over 20 years.

Yes, taxes on common grocery items like beverages are regressive, harm businesses and have the greatest impact on those who can least afford them.

Stuttaford also notes Guido Fawkes' piece on taxes --"Sugar taxes have been tried in various US states, France, Hungary, Finland, Mexico and Denmark. No impact on obesity or health has ever been found as a result of a sugar tax."

In fact, as we at Sip and Savor have noted, sugar consumption has been going down while at the same time, obesity rates are going up. Similarly, data from Britain’s Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs shows that sugar consumption has decreased 16 percent since 1992, says Stuttaford. It simply defies logic to claim this one ingredient is driving obesity.

The evidence is clear, taxes do not make people healthier. Instead of trying to push ineffective policies, the government should concentrate on what works: education on how to achieve and maintain a healthy weight through a balanced diet and physical activity. This is how we can make a real and lasting difference in combating obesity.

To learn more about why taxes on beverages do not work, check out The Truth About Beverage Taxes.