This report details findings from modeling the implementation of either a sugary drink excise tax or a sugary and diet drink excise tax in New York state, each at three potential tax rates ($0.01/ounce, $0.015/ounce, and $0.02/ounce).
All six tax models resulted in lower levels of sugary drink consumption, thousands of people for whom obesity would be prevented (referred to as “cases” throughout the reports), improved health equity, and hundreds of millions of dollars in health care cost savings.
This report was published in November 2021.
This report details findings from modeling the implementation of either a sugary drink excise tax or a sugary and diet drink excise tax in New York City, each at three potential tax rates ($0.01/ounce, $0.015/ounce, and $0.02/ounce).
All six tax models resulted in lower levels of sugary drink consumption, thousands of people for whom obesity would be prevented (referred to as “cases” throughout the reports), improved health equity, and hundreds of millions of dollars in health care cost savings.
This report was published in November 2021.
Boston is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Boston will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Boston Public Health Commission, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies in early child care settings to improve physical activity, reduce screen time, and promote prevention of excess weight gain.
Massachusetts is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Massachusetts will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
Along with key partners, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies in schools to improve physical activity, improve water intake, and promote prevention of excess weight gain.
Wisconsin is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Wisconsin will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the early and out-of-school care and community and government sectors to improve physical activity and promote healthy weight.
California is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. California will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the California Department of Public Health and the County of Santa Clara Public Health Department, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies in communities and government and school settings to reduce sugary drink consumption, improve water intake, and promote prevention of excess weight gain.
Iowa is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Iowa will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Iowa Department of Public Health, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the school and clinical sectors to improve physical activity and promote healthy weight.
Arkansas is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Arkansas will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Arkansas Department of Health, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the early and out-of-school care and community and government sectors to improve physical activity and promote healthy weight.
Salt Lake County is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Salt Lake County will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Salt Lake County Health Department, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies in communities and government and school settings to improve dietary intake, physical activity and prevention of excess weight gain.
Detroit is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Detroit will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Detroit Health Department and their core team partners – the United Way of Southeastern Michigan and Wayne State University – CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies in early care and out-of-school time settings to improve dietary intake, physical activity and prevention of excess weight gain.
Houston is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Houston will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Houston Health Department, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies in communities and government and school settings to improve dietary intake, physical activity and prevention of excess weight gain.
Partners at the Allegheny County Health Department used the CHOICES framework and tools to engage partners in identifying and prioritizing strategic opportunities for action to promote healthy weight for children in their community. Read more in the Story from the Field: Allegheny County Strengthens Partnerships to Make Progress Toward Local Impact
Allegheny County is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Allegheny County will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Allegheny County Health Department, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of strategies in out-of-school time and school settings to improve dietary intake, physical activity and prevention of excess weight gain.
Minnesota is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Minnesota will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Minnesota Department of Health, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the community and government and school sectors to reduce sugary drink consumption and improve physical activity and dietary intake:
San Antonio is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. San Antonio will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with Metro Health, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the early child care and out of school time sectors to improve physical activity, dietary intake and screen time.
Denver Health began implementing components from STAR in 2019. Read more in the Story from the Field: Denver Takes Action to Promote Healthy Child Weight
Denver is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Denver will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with Denver Public Health, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the community and government and clinical sectors to improve dietary intake, physical activity and prevention of excess weight gain.
Hawaii is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Hawaii will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Hawaii Department of Health, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the community and government and school sectors to improve physical activity and dietary intake.
In early 2017, Illinois’ Senate budget plan included a proposal to tax sugary drinks, but it was removed from subsequent versions of the plan. Illinois was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if the state moved forward and adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In April 2017, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax in Illinois. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent tens of thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Chicago Tribune: Illinois soda tax could cut health costs, raise $561 million in revenue annually
In April 2017, Mayor Ed Murray proposed to Seattle’s City Council a 1.75-cent-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened and diet beverages in Seattle to help raise money for much-needed programs in the city to promote healthy eating, especially among low-income communities.
In May 2017, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of Seattle’s proposed 1.75-cent per-ounce sugar-sweetened and diet beverage tax. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Progressive Grocer: Sugary Drink Tax Good for Health Care Costs, Public Health: Study
In June 2017, the Seattle City Council in a 7.1 vote passed a 1.75-cent-per-ounce excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverages, but diet drinks were exempted.
San Jose was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in San Jose in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in San Jose would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
San Diego was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in San Diego in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in San Diego would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
Phoenix was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Phoenix in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Phoenix would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
Oklahoma City was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Oklahoma City in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Oklahoma City would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Oklahoma City FOX affiliate: State tax revenue options being thrown around to help with budget shortfall
Oklahoma’s News 9: Harvard Study Examines Idea Of OKC Soda Tax
The Oklahoman: Enjoying that 44-ounce drink? Research shows taxing sugary beverages could bring health benefits to OKC
KGOU: Harvard Study Says ‘Soda Tax’ Could Generate Millions For Oklahoma City
Journal Record: Study: Soda tax would be good for OKC
Louisville was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Louisville in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Louisville would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
Los Angeles was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Los Angeles in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Los Angeles would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
Las Vegas was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Las Vegas in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Las Vegas would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Las Vegas Review Journal: Las Vegas could gain $25.2M in revenue from soda tax, report says
Jacksonville was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Jacksonville in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Jacksonville would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Jacksonville CBS affiliate: Tax on soda? Jacksonville organization pushes the proposed legislation
WJCT (Jacksonville NPR affiliate): 12/22/2016: Year In Review Media Roundtable; Soda Tax
Indianapolis was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Indianapolis in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Indianapolis would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
WFYI (Indianapolis NPR affiliate): Could A Tax On Sugary Drinks Really Help Save Lives?
Detroit was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Detroit in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Detroit would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
In partnership with Denver Public Health, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of a sugary drink excise tax, which modeled the potential implementation of a city excise tax on sugary drinks at a $0.02 per ounce tax. Read the report for more details.
The Denver $0.02 per ounce sugary drink excise tax model was projected to be cost-saving and resulted in lower levels of sugary drink consumption, thousands of cases of obesity prevented, and hundreds of millions of dollars in health care cost savings. Health care cost savings per dollar invested was $11 in the model.
Read the report to see all the findings and more details.
Columbus was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Columbus in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Columbus would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
Charlotte was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Charlotte in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Charlotte would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: The billion-dollar reason more cities might stand up to Coke and Pepsi
Food Navigator: 2016: The Year of the Sugar Tax
Forbes: A Billion Ways To Convince More Cities To Pass A Soda Tax
Baltimore was modeled as part of an effort CHOICES led in partnership with Healthy Food America that examined what the impact would be if 15 of the country’s largest cities adopted a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax.
In December 2016, CHOICES released a report examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage excise tax in Baltimore in addition to 14 other big U.S. cities. CHOICES analysis found that the tax in Baltimore would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Baltimore Sun: Harvard study says soda tax would have health benefit if implemented in Baltimore
In October 2016, the Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle proposed a one-cent-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in Cook County, Illinois to help close a 2017 budget shortfall. This tax would benefit 5.26 million people in the first year.
In November 2016, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of Cook County’s proposed one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened and diet beverage tax. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Huffington Post: Soda Is About To Get Pricier For Another 5 Million Americans – November 11, 2016
In November 2016, the Cook County Board of Commissioners in a 9-8 vote passed a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened and diet beverage tax.
On October 11, 2017, the Cook County Board of Commissioners repealed the sugar-sweetened and diet beverage tax. The repeal will take effect December 1, 2017.
Philadelphia is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Philadelphia will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Philadelphia Department of Public Health Division of Chronic Disease Prevention, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve the health of children in school and early care settings.
New Hampshire is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. New Hampshire will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the New Hampshire Division of Public Health Services, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the community and government sector that would improve dietary intake and interventions to improve the nutrition and physical activity in early care settings:
Alaska is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Alaska will use the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions in the community and government sector to improve dietary intake.
In September 2016 the City Clerk Lynnette Beck put the question of a two-cent-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages on the ballot in Boulder. The tax revenues would be earmarked for administration of the tax and for health and wellness programs. City staff would produce an annual report of how the tax revenue is spent. This tax would benefit 97,600 people in the first year.
In October 2016, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of Boulder’s proposed two-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent hundreds of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: A new study says soda taxes could save millions of dollars in healthcare costs — and that should terrify Coke and Pepsi – October 27, 2016
Bloomberg: On the Ballot Nov. 8: Clinton, Trump, Obesity, and Coke – October 28, 2016
Forbes: Bay Area And Boulder Soda Taxes Would Save Lives, Lower Healthcare Costs, Says Harvard – October 27, 2016
On November 8th, 2016, the electorate in Boulder voted in a 54 to 46 percent vote to pass a two-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax.
In mid-2016, the Albany City Council put the question of a one-cent-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages on the ballot. The revenue would not be earmarked for any special purpose, but rather would require the City Council to hold an annual public process to consider how best to spend the funds raised by the tax. This tax would benefit 19,100 people in the first year.
In October 2016, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of Albany’s proposed one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent almost 100 cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: A new study says soda taxes could save millions of dollars in healthcare costs — and that should terrify Coke and Pepsi – October 27, 2016
Bloomberg: On the Ballot Nov. 8: Clinton, Trump, Obesity, and Coke – October 28, 2016
Forbes: Bay Area And Boulder Soda Taxes Would Save Lives, Lower Healthcare Costs, Says Harvard – October 27, 2016
On November 8th, 2016, the electorate in Albany voted 71 to 28 percent vote to pass a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax.
In mid-2016, the Oakland City Council agreed unanimously to put the question of a one-cent-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages on the ballot in Oakland. The revenue raised would go into the city’s general fund, and then earmarked to pay for health and education programs in the community and in schools. The measure requires the city to create an advisory board to recommend how to spend the money. This tax would benefit 397,000 people in the first year.
In October 2016, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of Oakland’s proposed one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: A new study says soda taxes could save millions of dollars in healthcare costs — and that should terrify Coke and Pepsi – October 27, 2016
Bloomberg: On the Ballot Nov. 8: Clinton, Trump, Obesity, and Coke – October 28, 2016
On November 8th, 2016, the electorate in Oakland voted in a 61 to 39 percent vote to pass a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax.
In mid-2016 City Supervisor Malia Cohen put the question of a one-cent-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages on the ballot in San Francisco. The revenue would not be earmarked for any special purpose, but rather would go into the city’s general fund with an advisory panel set up to suggest ways to promote the dangers of heavy sugar consumption. This tax would benefit 801,000 people in the first year.
In October 2016, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of San Francisco’s proposed one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Business Insider: A new study says soda taxes could save millions of dollars in healthcare costs — and that should terrify Coke and Pepsi – October 27, 2016
Bloomberg: On the Ballot Nov. 8: Clinton, Trump, Obesity, and Coke – October 28, 2016
Forbes: Bay Area And Boulder Soda Taxes Would Save Lives, Lower Healthcare Costs, Says Harvard – October 27, 2016
On November 8th, 2016, the electorate in San Francisco voted 62 to 38 percent vote to pass a one-cent-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax.
In early 2016, Mayor Jim Kenney proposed to the City Council a three-cents-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in Philadelphia to help raise money for much-needed services in the city such as universal pre-K and public parks. This tax would benefit 1.54 million people in the first year.
In April 2016, CHOICES released a brief examining the cost-effectiveness and impact of Philadelphia’s proposed three-cents-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage tax. CHOICES analysis found that the tax would prevent thousands of cases of childhood and adult obesity, prevent new cases of diabetes, increase the number of healthy years lived by residents, and save more in future healthcare costs than it would cost to implement. Results include:
CHOICES analysis and results in the media:
Philadelphia Inquirer: Harvard study: Soda tax would make Phila. Healthier April 28, 2016
PhillyVoice.com: Harvard study: Philly’s soda tax would save $197 million in health-care costs April 28, 2016
In June 2016, the Philadelphia City Council in a 13-4 vote passed a 1.5-cent-per-ounce excise tax, making Philadelphia the first major U.S. city to adopt a tax on sugary and diet drinks.
Mississippi is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location that applied cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Mississippi is using the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the Mississippi State Department of Health, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of:
After Mississippi completed its collaboration with CHOICES, Tiffani Grant, Director of the Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity in the Office of Preventive Health at the Mississippi State Department of Health, commented on how cost-effectiveness analysis can inform decision making.
West Virginia is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location that applied cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. West Virginia is using the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
In partnership with the West Virginia Bureau for Public Health, CHOICES analyzed the impact and cost-effectiveness of:
After West Virginia completed its collaboration with CHOICES, Dr. Rahul Gupta, Commissioner for the West Virginia Bureau for Public Health, described the benefits of cost-effectiveness data.
Washington is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location that applied cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed strategies to reduce childhood obesity. Now Washington is using the results to inform decision-making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the strategies.
After Washington completed its collaboration with CHOICES, Janna Bardi, Assistant Secretary for Prevention and Community Health at the Washington State Department of Health, stressed the benefits of learning about the cost-effectiveness of the sugar-sweetened beverage tax intervention.
Screen time counseling in the Oklahoma WIC Program was rolled out in 2017. Read more in the Story from the Field: Oklahoma Takes Action to Improve Child Health
Oklahoma is a CHOICES Learning Collaborative Partnership location applying cost-effectiveness analysis to current or proposed childhood obesity prevention interventions. Oklahoma will use the results to inform decision making, strategic planning, and potential implementation of the interventions.
In partnership with the Oklahoma State Department of Health, CHOICES is analyzing the impact and cost-effectiveness of interventions that would improve the health of children ages 2-5 in the early care and community/government sectors.