Sugar tax could be extended to milkshakes and lattes to tackle obesity
The sugar tax applied to fizzy drinks could be extended to milkshakes and coffee drinks under UK Government proposals.
Plans to end the exemption from the levy for dairy-based drinks, as well as non-dairy substitutes such as oats or rice, were put out for consultation on Monday.
The tax would be applied to pre-packaged drinks cans of latte, flavoured milkshake drinks and cartons of milk alternatives.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves had said in her autumn budget last year that the Government would consider broadening the tax to include such drinks.
The so-called Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) was introduced by the previous Tory government in April 2018 as part of its anti-obesity drive.
Government statistics released last September showed the tax has raised a total of £1.9bn since it first came into effect.
The SDIL proposal seeks to reduce the maximum amount of sugar allowed in drinks before they become subject to the levy, lowering the threshold from 5g to 4g per 100ml.
Under the new plans, milk-based drinks would receive a 'lactose allowance', accounting for the naturally occurring sugars in milk.
The government says this could reduce daily calorie intake by an average of 1.2kcal in 19-64 year olds and 2.1kcal in 11-18 year olds to achieve health and economic benefits of around £4.2bn over 25 years.
Some 203 pre-packed milk-based drinks on the market, which make up 93% of sales within the category, will be subject to the tax unless their sugar content is reduced under the new proposals, according to Government analysis.
Sugar content in soft drinks collapsed by 46% in the past five years as a result of the levy introduced by chancellor George Osborne in 2016, according to the Food and Drink Federation.
As a result of widespread reformulation by manufacturers after the initial announcement, 89% of fizzy drinks sold in the UK do not pay the tax.
The sugar tax is currently charged at £1.94 per ten litres on drinks with 5g to 7.9g sugar per 100ml and £2.59 per ten litres for drinks with 8g or more sugar per 100ml.
The exemption for milk-based drinks was included because of concerns about calcium consumption, particularly among children.
However, the Treasury said young people only get 3.5% of their calcium intake from such drinks, meaning 'it is also likely that the health benefits do not justify the harms from excess sugar'.
'By bringing milk-based drinks and milk substitute drinks into the SDIL, the Government would introduce a tax incentive for manufacturers of these drinks to build on existing progress and further reduce sugar in their recipes,' it said.
The Institute for Economic Affairs, a right-wing free-market think tank, expressed concerns about the cost to consumers of the proposed changes.
They also argue that it has done little to tackle obesity in children.
UK sugar intake remains about double the recommended level, according to government statistics.
The most recent data from the Scottish Health Survey 2022 shows that 18% of children aged two to 15 are now at risk of developing obesity – the Scottish Government's 2030 target is 7%.
Consumption of sugary soft drinks is also more than twice as high among the most deprived children compared to the least deprived – 29.1% compared to 13.1%.
'The sugar tax has been such a dramatic failure that it should be repealed, not expanded,' said Christopher Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the institute.
'Sugar taxes have never worked anywhere. What happened to Starmer's promise to not raise taxes on working people?'
The Government consultation on the plans will run from Monday until July 21.
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
39 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Rachel Reeves pumps cash into NHS with 4m more tests and procedures to cut waits
The NHS and defence were big winners from the Chancellor's Spending Review as Rachel Reeves set out the Government's spending plans for the rest of the decade Rachel Reeves turned on the spending taps today with a £300billion package to renew Britain. The Chancellor said "destructive" Tory austerity had inflicted misery on ordinary Brits and damaged the economy, and vowed: "My choices are different". The NHS and defence were big winners from the Spending Review as Ms Reeves set out the Government's spending plans for the rest of the decade. The NHS was handed an extra £29billion-a-year, a 3% increase for day-to-day running costs over the next three years. Tonight, the Chancellor promised up to 4 million additional NHS tests and procedures would be delivered over the next five years to help slash waiting lists. New scanners, more community diagnostic centres, ambulances and Urgent Treatment Centres will be put in place, with increased capacity in community care to reduce pressure on hospitals. The Chancellor pumped an additional £190billion into day-to-day spending, with Government budgets set to grow by 2.3% per year across the period 2023/24 to 2028/29. And she announced £113billion for infrastructure projects, including £39billion for affordable homes over the next decade, £15.6billion for transport networks outside of London and £16.7billion for nuclear power. Some £30 billion will also be invested over the next five years in maintenance and repair of the crumbling NHS estate, with more than £5 billion dedicated to the most critical repairs. Keir Starmer told the Cabinet that it marked "the end of the first phase of this government, as we move to a new phase that delivers on the promise of change for working people". In a statement to MPs, Ms Reeves said her plans were a far cry from Tory austerity, where public spending was cut by 2.9% per year in 2010. She said: "Let's be clear, austerity was a destructive choice for the fabric of our society. And it was a destructive choice for our economy too, choking off investment and demand, creating a lost decade for growth, wages and living standards." She added: "My choices are different. My choices are Labour choices. The choices in this spending review are possible only because of my commitment to economic stability and the decisions that this Government has made." Ms Reeves said Labour was "renewing Britain", adding: 'I know that too many people in too many parts of our country are yet to feel it. This Government's task, my task as chancellor, and the purpose of this spending review is to change that, to ensure that renewal is felt in people's everyday lives, in their jobs and on their high streets." Defence spending will hit 2.6% of GDP by 2027 - including cash for intelligence - made up by a raid on the foreign aid budget. But no details were given on when the Prime Minister will meet his ambition of hiking it to 3%. A massive £86billion will be spent on the science and technology sector by the end of this Parliament, including funding research into drug treatments. The Chancellor also promised to set out plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR), a scheme to improve rail services between Liverpool and Leeds. There was also £3.5 billion more funding for the TransPennine Route Upgrade between York and Manchester, as well as £445million for rail in Wales over the next 10 years, and funding for a new line between Oxford and Cambridge. Schools will see their budgets swell by £2 billion, with per pupil funding to grow by 1.1% a year. Some £2.3 billion per year will go to fixing "crumbling classrooms" and £2.4 billion per year to rebuild 500 schools. But the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned that paying for an expansion of free school meals to another 500,000 children whose families claim Universal Credit next year means a real terms freeze to school funding. Labour will stop housing asylum seekers in hotels by the end of this Parliament, saving the taxpayer £1billion a year. But policing is expected to feel the squeeze as the Home Office grapples with cuts exceeding the asylum savings. The National Police Chiefs' Council warned a projected £1.2 billion shortfall in funding is expected to grow, leaving forces facing further cuts. There will also be £7 billion to fund 14,000 new prison places and up to £700 million per year for probation reforms. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Department for Transport and Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are all in line for real-terms cuts. Much of the funding has been front-loaded to the start of this Parliament, which means the average increase falls to around 1.5% from 2025-26. Stephen Millard, interim director of the NIESR economic research institute, said: "The Chancellor has yet again said that her fiscal rules are 'non-negotiable'. But, given the small amount of headroom at the time of the spring statement and the increases in spending announced since then, it is now almost inevitable that if she is to keep to her fiscal rules, she will have to raise taxes in the autumn budget." Health leaders said the cash boost for the NHS would not guarantee waiting time targets can be met. Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, warned that "difficult decisions will still need to be made as this additional £29 billion won't be enough to cover the increasing cost of new treatments, with staff pay likely to account for a large proportion of it".
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Reeves has folded like the Tin Foil Chancellor she is
Rachel Reeves confirmed on Wednesday that she is a ' spend today, tax tomorrow ' Chancellor. Her spending spree on the country's credit card has set us on a collision course with the autumn when more tax rises will hit working families' pockets hard. After a year of chaos, how can anyone take this Government seriously? Rather than using the spending review as an opportunity to deliver secure public finances, the Chancellor is instead lurching from one disaster to the next. The cruel cuts to winter fuel payments, the £30 billion Chagos Islands surrender and the billions in no-strings-attached union handouts are all chickens that have come home to roost. When the pressure is on, the self-styled 'Iron Chancellor' folds like the 'Tin Foil Chancellor' she really is. She promised to get borrowing down, but the deficit is up by 70 per cent on her watch. She pledged no new taxes rises, yet more are on their way. She pledged not to change pensioner benefits, then U-turned. Then U-turned again. The only consistent thing about her is her inconsistency. Her own MPs, Cabinet ministers and Labour's trade union paymasters smell weakness. They know she's vulnerable and they will demand more money – and get it if they shout loud enough. The Chancellor has boxed herself into a corner. We face an extra £200 billion of borrowing this Parliament compared with the last Conservative Budget, with £80 billion more in interest payments alone. We are almost a year in but no economic plan is forthcoming. Our country is exposed. We have no room left to respond to shocks in global markets. Interest rates and mortgages are staying higher for longer because of her choices, as the OBR has said. She trumpets the hundreds of billions in extra spending she has announced while on the other hand claiming to have fixed the public finances. It simply doesn't make sense. She claims there is 'still work to do to ensure the sums add up'. That's not stability, it's uncertainty – the very last thing markets want to hear. It is not just markets. Her abject failure means British families have seen inflation almost double, unemployment rise, growth stalling, debt interest soar and pensioners sacrificed. The country is worse off because of her choices. What of the winter fuel U-turn? Last summer, pensioners were left out in the cold to avoid 'a run on the pound', as Labour's Lucy Powell put it. Now they claim they can afford to reverse it because they have fixed the economy and the finances – but economists are saying both are in a worse state since Labour came to office. Nothing's changed except the Government's credibility, which is vanishing. Rock bottom confidence There was nothing in her review restore rock bottom business confidence. Payrolls fell by over 100,000 last month alone. Unemployment is up 10 per cent since Labour took office. Only businesses create growth and jobs. But our Chancellor has not yet learnt that basic lesson of economics, her fingers planted firmly in her ears whilst the alarm bells are ringing. Similarly, the first and most important duty of any Prime Minister is keeping the country safe. But even as the world is becoming more dangerous and a new axis of evils draws their battle lines, there was no further progress towards spending 3 per cent of GDP on defence, which Labour claim to be committed to. They stood firm on the Chagos surrender, which is paying for tax cuts for Mauritians while we suffer, costing our country £30 billion to lease back our own land. There is no urgency on the issues of the day. The Home Office budget too has been significantly hit by asylum costs, while illegal crossings soar. Rather than point the finger at everyone else, the Chancellor should take responsibility and fix the problems she has created. Instead, the socialist's lazy embrace of high spending, more borrowing and higher taxes beckons – leaving our public finances dangerously vulnerable. If we were in charge, we would take a different approach. We wouldn't kill growth with tax rises and red tape. We'd restore confidence, focus on efficiency and productivity, and reform welfare to get people off benefits and into work. At the end of the day, it's working people and businesses who will pay – with higher taxes, higher costs, and fewer opportunities. This Spending Review is unaffordable, and so is this Chancellor.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
KKR threat to NHS landlord: Don't give the barbarians a foothold in a sacred public service, says ALEX BRUMMER
Freed from the proposed £4billion rescue of Thames Water, private equity barons KKR have come fizzing back with an upgraded offer for NHS and private healthcare landlords Assura. KKR's latest and final bid of £1.7billion is only marginally better than that from listed rival Primary Health Properties (PHP) but is being recommended by Assura's board. The battle isn't necessarily over, with PHP still looking at options and claiming Chancellor Rachel Reeves's bonanza spending on the NHS as an ally. As has become customary when listed companies seek to vanish from the London stock market, there is extensive waffle from Assura about careful evaluation and fiduciary duty. The latter is investment banker-speak for running up the white flag. In cash terms, the KKR offer, at 52.1p a share, is barely better than the 51.7p bid from PHP. A 39 per cent premium may seem wonderful but given the depressed state of share valuations in London and a recent tech offer with a 96 per cent premium, the KKR deal is hardly effervescent. There is no obligation for Assura to accept either deal. A braver board would have told the private equity plunderers to get lost. Instead, it chose to disparage the alternative 'merger' with PHP, claiming financial and execution risk. The board also argues that the PHP offer would diminish Assura's efforts to support investment in the NHS estate. Who is Assura kidding? KKR fears too much exposure to regulated British assets and the political risk which comes with it as we learned when it pulled out of the near-complete Thames Water deal. Assura also needs to remind itself of how private equity works. Load up target companies with debt, squeeze costs, do some clever financial engineering with the leverage, raise prices or rents and head for the hills. A Government which better understood how highly indebted deals work might be cautious. A reading of the Competition & Markets Authority's work on veterinary services, revealing how the cost to pet owners and farmers has escalated, illustrates the dangers. More market-based private medicine in the UK eases pressure on the NHS. But allowing the barbarians a foothold in a sacred service is unacceptable even if it's wrapped up with tinsel and a bow. Sign of the Zodiac This week's pandemic of bids for Britain's tech crown jewels and skin care specialists rightly has been accompanied by much handwringing. How is it that companies born and bred in UK science and tech struggle to develop into national champions? After all, the City is second only to New York as a financial centre and is home to one of the world's biggest collection of banks and a strong venture capital industry. There ought to be no bars to start-ups or smaller listed firms accessing capital. Freeing up pension funds, allowing them to be more adventurous, ought to help. But swift market access to funding and liquidity is the key. That is why the launch of Pisces, the London Stock Exchange's platform for 'intermittent' capital, a place to come to raise funding and then vanish behind a privacy wall, is an important innovation. Stock exchange group boss David Schwimmer has been promoting the concept for years but freeing it from the weeds of regulatory bureaucracy is not easy. The insistence on broad-based disclosure rules threatened to sideline it. So it is good to learn that the Financial Conduct Authority, in keeping with the growth agenda, has dropped onerous transparency requirements on the environment, shareholder transactions and director pay. These threatened to strangle Pisces at birth. Let the fundraising begin before the rush to the door of UK tech and AI becomes a stampede. Peer pressure It has become something of a thing for Chancellors to name-check colleagues when delivering grand financial statements to the Commons. Rachel Reeves set a record with her pledges to spend, spend, spend in Labour constituencies in the North, Midlands, Scotland and Wales. Lonely Weymouth was the only southern town to receive much of a mention. Unlike Southport, it already has a serviceable pier.
