Kerala’s fat tax isn’t about tackling obsesity
On paper, Kerala's proposal to tax certain ‘junk food' items to tackle the State's burgeoning obesity problem looks great. If a certain kind of food is making people fat, and we can't directly ban those items, then let's just put that food out of the reach of the vast majority of people. This will force people to eat healthy, rightIJ Well, it's not quite as simple as that. Even if one were to set aside the worrying nanny state tendencies that such decisions betray, there are still some fundamental problems. For one, how does the Government define junk foodIJ It doesn't. It only lists certain items, such as burgers, pizzas, tacos, doughnuts, sandwiches, burger patties, pasta and bread-fillings which will be taxable.
These are mostly Western items, commonly sold at multi-national food retail chains (which seems to be the Government's actual target — after the announcement, the share values of the parent companies which run Domino's Pizza and McDonald's in South India, for example, fell on the BSE). The Kerala Government has left out a large number of food items, such parottas and beef fry for example, that ideally should be on the list. This is because of the Government’s haphazard approach. It has merely listed certain items that are commonly considered to be ‘fattening', and not bothered to put together a regulatory framework.
For example, when Denmark levied its much talked-about ‘fat tax’ in 2011 (it has since been scrapped), it set out the basic parameters — all foods that contained more than 2.3 per cent of saturated fat was to be taxed. This included not just processed foods but also milk, butter, cheese and oil. Mexico did something similar (and with a greater degree of success). In 2014, it levied an eight per cent tax on all non-essential food items which had an energy density of more than 275 kcal per 100g and a 10 per cent tax on all sugar-sweetened beverages. These decisions were based on facts, science and research. The Government gets experts to study the issue, they offer recommendations on what is healthy and what is junk, how much fat is acceptable and at which point the Government should draw the line etc. Then a proper decision is made.
The question is: Why did the Kerala Government have such a callous approach to the issueIJ Simple answer: The tax is not really to penalise unhealthy food choices but, in part, to raise revenue and, in part, to play up some populist demands. As Kerala's Finance Minister noted while presenting the revised Budget last week, the tax will bring an additional Rs10 crore to the State's coffers. This is small change but it's easy to implement and shows the Government in good light, actively taking on obesity, a major public health concern. In January, Bihar had similarly imposed a 13.5 per cent tax on samosas, salted peanuts, sweets and some branded snacks — not to promote healthy living — but to make up for losses stemming from the liquor sale ban.