Thank you for the info. It is really interesting. Could you possibly provide
a link or citation I could use in my thesis?

I found some interesting recommendations from NZ, they even suggest taxing
TV commercials and pet food :)
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/taxreview2001/Subs1/MedEco.pdf

In Manitoba it seems that preventive "healthy" food rather than unhealthy
"staple" gets taxed:
"Products that are consumed to sustain or maintain life, to
allay hunger or thirst, or for enjoyment are generally regarded to be food
and beverages (exempt). Products that claim to have a therapeutic or
preventative effect, to enhance mental or physical performance or enhance
physique are generally regarded to be dietary supplements (taxable)."
http://www.gov.mb.ca/finance/taxation/bulletins/029.pdf

In my thesis I'm making a case for a prevention fund. Only 1% of health
expenditure goes to prevention, it's clearly because of both market failure
and regulation failure. I envision that such fund would finance
cost-effective population health interventions of long term scope -
investment in population health. Such interventions might be social
marketing or subsidies and transfers. The problem is to find sources of
funding. To correct externalities the doers of harm should pay and the
financial burden should also act as a deterrent. My concept is just that - a
concept, since I am aware that regulation options are limited due to WTO
restrictions on trade restrictions. There are no genuine lobbies for
population health and goverments would rather subsidize tobacco growers than
health promotion (as in EU). My other concept is that of long term future
contracts simillar to cat bonds (catastrophic). This idea it too futuristic
to even get published, I suppose.

Thanks again,

Jaroslaw G. Wechowski, M.D.
Ph.D. candidate
Warsaw School of Economics
Poland

-----Original Message-----
From: Health Promotion on the Internet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf
Of Sutherland Alan
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 12:50 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Hunger and obesity and taxes


Whist I reserve any comments on the ethics of this approach, you may want to
be aware that the Australian Government when introducing the GST (Goods and
Services Tax) had a very large and heated debate about taxing food.  As a
result fresh food is not taxed (GST) but cooked food is (restaurants, take
aways and yes even cooked chickens).  Some frozen (prepared foods) are taxed
others not.  Just to make your policy thinking even more complex, Australian
consumers of sugar will pay a higher price for sugar to offset the cost of
paying farmers to get out of growing sugar cane.  To make us healthy? Don't
kid yourself...it's because the global food market can sell sugar cheaper
than we can produce.


Regards

Alan Sutherland
Policy Officer, Strategic Development
Department of Health and Human Services
2/10 Murray St, Hobart 7000
Tel: 6233 3147

To unsubscribe send one line: unsubscribe click4hp to: [log in to unmask] .
To view archives or modify subscription see:
http://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/click4hp.html

To unsubscribe send one line: unsubscribe click4hp to: [log in to unmask] . To view archives or modify subscription see: http://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/click4hp.html