Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Hungary introduces "fat tax" on unhealthy foods
A new bill found it's way onto the political docket in Hungary earlier this week, that if passed would create the world's first "fat tax." The Eastern European country's parliament will now consider the bill, which would raise the price of foods that are deemed as unhealthy. Proceeds from the new law would then be used to cover the rising costs of state-funded health care.When the bill was originally drafted a few months back, it was immediately dubbed as "the hamburger tax," but later the Hungarian government decided that fast food restaurants would not be subject to the new tax. Instead, they've chosen to levy the tariff on items found in grocery and convenience stores that are deemed to have too much salt, sugar, or fat. If the law goes into effect, those items would go up in price by 3.7 eurocents or roughly 5¢. There will also be a 10% increase in the price of liquor and soft drinks as well.
The bill will be debated by the Hungarian Parliament later this summer, but is expected to easily pass into law, making the country the first to actually institute higher fees on unhealthy foods. It is estimated that the law would generate as much as 111 million Euros or approximately $157.6 million. Those funds that are sorely needed to help keep Hungary's cash-strapped health care system afloat.
What are your thoughts on this so-called fat tax? Would you pay a little more for foods you love that might be deemed as unhealthy? Is this any different than the so called "sin tax" on cigarettes or alcohol?
Filed under: Arts and Culture, Learning, Food and Drink, Europe, Hungary, News
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Alex Jul 14th 2011 3:47PM
It's not the government's job to try and tell us what we should and should not eat, which is basically the purpose of this tax - to discourage people from buying unhealthy foods. Watch for this to happen in the U.S. soon, with Michelle Obama running around on her obesity crusade (when she's not vacationing with her entourage on the taxpayers' dime).
Paris Jul 16th 2011 4:10PM
People like you always say it is not the government’s job to tell you what to eat. However when you have a heart attack and your insurance will not cover the cost you expect the government (the rest of us) to pick up the tab. You want to eat whatever you want then you should have to sign a waiver stating that when things go wrong, and they will, you are on your own. With rights go responsibilities.
jogo Jul 16th 2011 4:41PM
That is the problem..if the government is paying for your healthcare, they will do things like this..Not that it is a bad idea to push people to eat healthier..but they should charge companies that do not find ways to make the foods we like, healthier..that is where things would really change for the good.
Degibu Jul 16th 2011 5:25PM
OK, then explain to me if, according to you, it's not the government's job to tell us what to eat (or what NOT to eat), what about when it comes down to the government having to pay for health care (ie, hospitalization, medications etc) when the MORONS in this country eat CRAP day in and day out, ending up with hearth disease, hypertention, diabetes, high cholesterol, and are either on Medicare of Medicaid? Since the dim wits cannot, or chose not to, eat properly, LET the government make money on them! After all, it's YOUR money that they government is paying with.
Walking Man Jul 16th 2011 6:33PM
The government shouldn't have to tell you what to eat, but with obesity rates at 20-30 percent of Americans it's obvious people aren't smart enough to do it themselves.
wllharrington Jul 16th 2011 6:37PM
She got to pay for the trips somehow.
Barry Jul 16th 2011 7:27PM
Tax increase is too little. Treat the bad foods like cigarettes and tripple the price. Then spend 15% of the take on fat food programs and the rest on what ever you want. Works for smokes.
harry Jul 16th 2011 8:47PM
just another excuse to tax more. look at cigs as an example... nothing is supposed to be worse right? if that is true, then why are they allowed to be sold? its all about more taxes folks.
Sandra Jul 16th 2011 9:31PM
Alex, I'm waiting for this to happen any day here in the U.S. It is not the government's place to say what we eat. That is a personal choice.
Corey Jul 16th 2011 9:56PM
To the one that complained about people being on medicare or medicad.
Almost everyone over 65 is on medicare, that is what you pay your taxes for all those years. You still have to pay a monthly premium to keep medicare.
Medicad is the one given to the people that are younger and don't have insurance.
Annoyed Jul 16th 2011 9:56PM
The government is NOT telling us what to or what NOT to eat. You purchase an unhealthy food known to cause health concerns then you pay more for it. No where does this artical say anything regarding the governments attempt to say what we can or CAN'T eat/ buy.
Suzie Jul 16th 2011 10:45PM
Michelle could stand to lose some pounds of her own and quit making it her place to enforce this healthy eating on others. If one wants to be fat, it is their business, but it also must be their business to have their own health care and not expect the government to pay for it and their health issues. Though, I do eat healthy on the most part, I definitely NEED all that junk food to maintain my weight. Being that I am under 100lbs I can afford (weight, not meaning financially) to eat what I want. If I happen not to have that malt (with protein), chocolate, or whatever kind of desserts for a couple days, I will drop several pounds, and that, I do not want. I certainly wouldn't want to pay a tax on these things that keep me at my weight. And to those that tell me that I need to eat more healthy food to gain....well, it just doesn't work for me.
itsme2 Jul 17th 2011 1:13PM
yeah, and secretly eatting the things she preaches to us NOT TO EAT!!
linda Jul 20th 2011 6:51AM
THIS HAS TO DO WITH OBAMAS WIFE, DID SEE FORGET OBAMA SMOKESSSSS SO LETS TKE HIS INSURANCE AWAY,
AND HOW MUCH FAT TAX DO YOU THINK SHE WILL PUT ON OPRA
LOLA Jul 17th 2011 5:19AM
It should only be that we tax based on content on ALL unhealthy foods
FAT
SODIUM
SUGAR
COLESTROL
we could raise MILLIONS and use the $$$ to subsize farmers , prices can drop on HEALTHY fresh foods and more people can afford to buy HEALTHY choices that ( at this point) may just be too expensive
frank Jul 17th 2011 12:31PM
Well, are you aware how much its costing you and me to pay for all the illness caused by obesity? its braking the medicare...my family is 50% obsene fats, which i refuse to speak to unless they made an effort to get off their fat asses like i did to become healthy and fit, not talking about muscle bound, talking fit...and as per Michelle Obama she is tackling a real issue which is a real problem and the fatsos in congress and senate refuse to do anything about it,,,,
mel Jul 17th 2011 2:28PM
The government already tells us what we should and should not feed our families - this is nothing new.
In the US, the government highly subsidizes corn and soybeans, causing products made from those items to be significantly cheaper than others (chips, soda, prepackaged goods, etc). That's why it is cheaper, calorie for calorie, for people to buy chips rather than broccoli, or soda rather than milk. What do you expect people to do when they're living pay check to pay check and trying to feed their families? They're going to buy the cheapest foods they can to fill their bellies - no matter how unhealthy. It's hypocritical to then turn around and tax those items deemed "unhealthy" when those are the items subsidized in the first place! The government would do better to subsidize growers of broccoli, carrots, and kale (and other healthy veggies) as well as fresh fruits to keep the cost of those products down, than to slap a tax on anything with "too much sugar, fat, or salt".
Brian Jul 25th 2011 5:33PM
Personally I prefer "sin taxes" on things we wish to discourage (say smoking) rather than than things we might want to encourage (say for instance WORKING). One can always elect not to participate by not using the taxed item. Marriage on the other hand is hard to avoid and heavily penalized by AMT. Why don't you complain about that??
carly Jul 14th 2011 10:37PM
I completely agree with the 'fat tax.' I think if the country is needing money for the health care program because people are obese and develop other health problems, the best thing to do is tax the foods with excessive fat, salt, and sugar. But also think they should propose incentives for people who attend the gym or live healthy lives. The fact is the government's number one job is to create and cultivate successful opportunities for their inhabitants. The insurance has obviously been strained for a while and the government is doing their job to make sure that their opportunities continue to be successful.
Patti Jul 16th 2011 4:55PM
Carly I completely agree. my healthcare paln offers free fitness cub and weight watchers memberships. You hear people compain constantly about the cost of health foods. We are ahving salmon with stuffed paptypan squash and sld for supper. Costs less than 20.00 to serve 4.00.