Impact of the Seattle Sweetened Beverage Tax on substitution to alcoholic beverages

PLoS One. 2022 Jan 18;17(1):e0262578. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262578. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

Introduction: Taxes are increasingly used as a policy tool aimed at reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), given their association with adverse health outcomes including type 2 diabetes, obesity and cardiovascular disease. However, a potential unintended consequence of such a policy could be that the tax induces substitution to alcoholic beverages. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of the $0.0175 per ounce Seattle, Washington, Sweetened Beverage Tax (SBT) on volume sold of alcoholic beverages.

Methods: A difference-in-differences estimation approach was used drawing on universal product code-level food store scanner data on beer (N = 1059) and wine (N = 2655) products one-year pre-tax (February-November, 2017) and one and two-years post-tax (February-November, 2018 and 2019) with Portland, Oregon, as the comparison site.

Results: At two-years post-tax implementation, volume sold of beer in Seattle relative to Portland increased by 7% (ratio of incidence rate ratios [RIRR] = 1.07, 95% CI:1.00,1.15), whereas volume sold of wine decreased by 3% (RIRR = 0.97, 95% CI:0.95,1.00). Overall alcohol (both beer and wine) volume sold increased in Seattle compared to Portland by 4% (RIRR = 1.04, 95% CI:1.01,1.07) at one-year post-tax and by 5% (RIRR = 1.05, 95% CI:1.00,1.10) at two-years post-tax. The implied SSB cross-price elasticities of demand for beer and wine, respectively, were calculated to be 0.35 and -0.15.

Conclusions: There was evidence of substitution to beer following the implementation of the Seattle SSB tax. Continued monitoring of potential unintended outcomes related to the implementation of SSB taxes is needed in future tax evaluations.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Alcoholic Beverages / economics*
  • Commerce / statistics & numerical data*
  • Consumer Behavior / economics*
  • Costs and Cost Analysis
  • Government Regulation*
  • Health Plan Implementation*
  • Humans
  • Sugar-Sweetened Beverages / economics*
  • Sugar-Sweetened Beverages / legislation & jurisprudence
  • Taxes / legislation & jurisprudence*

Grants and funding

This study was supported by a grant (grant number 49255) from Bloomberg Philanthropies’ Obesity Prevention Initiative (www.bloomberg.org). The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of Bloomberg Philanthropies. The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.