Take with pinch of salt

Today, a prohibitive tax on junk food seems to be the next step towards better public health yet it is imperative we consider the implications of this tax. We need to consider the effectiveness of a prohibitive tax in truly deterring people. We have seen that prohibitive taxes have been implemented on alcohol, cigarettes and tobacco yet these taxes have failed to deter people from such vices. In most cases, these taxes simply merge with the cost of the product and the result is no effective decrease in demand. Moreover, simply a prohibitive tax will only have a marginal effect on decreasing consumption of junk food and sugary drinks. This will also have a severe effect on the cost of other products. When the costs of sugary drinks and junk food are increased, it causes the rise in prices of other products in order to generate more revenue. This means that everyone would have to pay more for food, which will affect the poverty-stricken sections of society the most. Crisps, sugary drinks, candy, and the list goes on...the tidbits of junk food that not only satiate our hunger, but are also a part of our daily diet.

In this fast-paced world, junk food solves the problem of the need to cook. The two-minute Maggi saves so many of us from going to bed hungry after a long day. And getting a packet of crisps is definitely easier than getting up early to cut fruits. So junk food turns out to be a saviour for millions. But is it? ‘’Input=output’’ and hence, you now have a generation where almost every second child suffers from malnutrition or deficiencies or obesity. A prohibitive tax would invariably increase the price of junk food. As the law of demand says, “All things being equal, the demand for a commodity will increase with a decrease in price and decrease with an increase in price.’’ The prohibitive tax would be a Lakshman Rekha — a deterrent for us. The government should definitely place a prohibitive tax on junk food and sugary drinks .