Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Soda Tax

Options
13567…10

Replies

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
    Restaurants can't offer free refills of soda anymore, because it needs to be taxed by the ounce. Bars have to figure out exactly how much Coke is in their "Jack and Coke" and tax based on that. Does it matter how much of the glass is ice? It's just a little wacky and not really well thought out.

    They can offer free refills (I was at a restaurant last night, bought a diet soda, and got free refills). I checked to see if this was on the up and up, since it didn't even cross my mind, and although this is confusing I think it says it's fine, just charge the tax on the amount sold (the first drink, not the refills):

    "How should the tax be imposed when the retailer offers unlimited refills and does not know if a customer gets no refills or multiple refills?... The ordinance requires the tax to be applied to each ounce sold. The retailer has the discretion to offer refills, but must assure tax is remitted per ounce sold. If a 20oz beverage is sold, the tax is $0.20. The addition of ice is at the discretion of the retailer/customer. If the business uses cups with an ice fill line, where they have already determined the number of ounces that fill the cup, the business can submit that information to the Department as proof of the number of ounces sold."
  • SuzySunshine99
    SuzySunshine99 Posts: 2,984 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
    Restaurants can't offer free refills of soda anymore, because it needs to be taxed by the ounce. Bars have to figure out exactly how much Coke is in their "Jack and Coke" and tax based on that. Does it matter how much of the glass is ice? It's just a little wacky and not really well thought out.

    They can offer free refills (I was at a restaurant last night, bought a diet soda, and got free refills). I checked to see if this was on the up and up, since it didn't even cross my mind, and although this is confusing I think it says it's fine, just charge the tax on the amount sold (the first drink, not the refills):

    "How should the tax be imposed when the retailer offers unlimited refills and does not know if a customer gets no refills or multiple refills?... The ordinance requires the tax to be applied to each ounce sold. The retailer has the discretion to offer refills, but must assure tax is remitted per ounce sold. If a 20oz beverage is sold, the tax is $0.20. The addition of ice is at the discretion of the retailer/customer. If the business uses cups with an ice fill line, where they have already determined the number of ounces that fill the cup, the business can submit that information to the Department as proof of the number of ounces sold."

    There's a lot of confusion with the implementation. If it's self-serve, the restaurant has no control over what the consumer does with that cup as far as ice and refills. But, if a server is bringing the free refills, it is likely that the restaurant is simply shouldering the tax so as to not burden their customers with it. Restaurants are paying the tax up-front from their suppliers.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 33,969 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
    Restaurants can't offer free refills of soda anymore, because it needs to be taxed by the ounce. Bars have to figure out exactly how much Coke is in their "Jack and Coke" and tax based on that. Does it matter how much of the glass is ice? It's just a little wacky and not really well thought out.

    They can offer free refills (I was at a restaurant last night, bought a diet soda, and got free refills). I checked to see if this was on the up and up, since it didn't even cross my mind, and although this is confusing I think it says it's fine, just charge the tax on the amount sold (the first drink, not the refills):

    "How should the tax be imposed when the retailer offers unlimited refills and does not know if a customer gets no refills or multiple refills?... The ordinance requires the tax to be applied to each ounce sold. The retailer has the discretion to offer refills, but must assure tax is remitted per ounce sold. If a 20oz beverage is sold, the tax is $0.20. The addition of ice is at the discretion of the retailer/customer. If the business uses cups with an ice fill line, where they have already determined the number of ounces that fill the cup, the business can submit that information to the Department as proof of the number of ounces sold."

    That's nuts.

    The beverage dispensers dispense a syrup. Won't be long before the tax is on the amount used by the business - i.e. at the distributor level. Otherwise the tax should be a flat tax per - oh never mind. That hurts my head to even contemplate. It's Sunday, yo.

    What a mess for retailers. :no_mouth:
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    cmriverside wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
    Restaurants can't offer free refills of soda anymore, because it needs to be taxed by the ounce. Bars have to figure out exactly how much Coke is in their "Jack and Coke" and tax based on that. Does it matter how much of the glass is ice? It's just a little wacky and not really well thought out.

    They can offer free refills (I was at a restaurant last night, bought a diet soda, and got free refills). I checked to see if this was on the up and up, since it didn't even cross my mind, and although this is confusing I think it says it's fine, just charge the tax on the amount sold (the first drink, not the refills):

    "How should the tax be imposed when the retailer offers unlimited refills and does not know if a customer gets no refills or multiple refills?... The ordinance requires the tax to be applied to each ounce sold. The retailer has the discretion to offer refills, but must assure tax is remitted per ounce sold. If a 20oz beverage is sold, the tax is $0.20. The addition of ice is at the discretion of the retailer/customer. If the business uses cups with an ice fill line, where they have already determined the number of ounces that fill the cup, the business can submit that information to the Department as proof of the number of ounces sold."

    That's nuts.

    The beverage dispensers dispense a syrup. Won't be long before the tax is on the amount used by the business - i.e. at the distributor level. Otherwise the tax should be a flat tax per - oh never mind. That hurts my head to even contemplate. It's Sunday, yo.

    What a mess for retailers. :no_mouth:

    Yeah, I assume they will clarify it. I expect something like the ridiculous plastic bag roll out with ever changing rules. It seems like it would be easier to exempt restaurants/bars, IMO.

    I don't feel sorry for retailers given the mark-up, though. I paid $3 for a regular glass of diet soda. Got charged for one even though I got a refill. There's not a specific tax line beyond the overall tax on the bill, so maybe the tax is in the $3, but that's pretty standard for a restaurant soda IME.

    I can't imagine it's tougher than with alcohol, although there of course they are also somewhat restricted in what standard sizes are and cannot do free refills for reasons other than taxes (although my knowledge about the rules on alcohol sales in IL is rusty).
  • vixtris
    vixtris Posts: 688 Member
    Options
    Wonder if it effects the soda stream products? I am kind of doubting it, since it said that 'additive powders and syrups' aren't taxed.
  • slider728
    slider728 Posts: 1,494 Member
    Options
    I know exactly what county this is as I live nearby (outside of your county thankfully).

    If anyplace else in the nation implemented this tax, I might actually think they were doing this in the best interest of the public.

    Because of where it is, this is nothing but trying to generate another tax revenue stream. Personally, I am 100% against it in this case, just because I think the politicians are BSing about their reasons for the tax.
  • ccruz985
    ccruz985 Posts: 646 Member
    Options
    If that's the case, water should be free. I find these taxes to be stupid and not at all about health and more about another way to squeeze money out of the populace.
  • SuzySunshine99
    SuzySunshine99 Posts: 2,984 Member
    Options
    czmiles926 wrote: »
    A sugar tax will soon be implemented in the UK on soft drinks. And I'm all for it. Soft drinks have no nutritional benefits, I've always viewed soft drinks as a luxury but some people drink them like they're water which is not right. And it's our NHS that has to deal with these people when they get diabetes.

    Are they including drinks with artificial sweeteners or just those with sugar?
    That's a big issue I have with this tax...that it includes no-calorie, sugar-free drinks.
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,426 Member
    Options
    The questions in the OP are would the tax have an impact on people's health and would impact your beverage buying choices.

    Health impact- It is not making much sense what they want people to consume less of.. If sugar is the issue they are not taxing all sugar drinks and are taxing artificially sweetened drinks. If calories are the concern they are skipping taxing high calorie coffee drinks but taxing diet pop. I don't think it will change most people's health.
    I don't think people view food or drinks in the same way they view cigarettes and what is healthy/unhealthy is less clearly defined so I don't think taxing would have the same impact.

    Behavior impact- I drink water or unsweetened tea. My family drinks pop occasionally. The tax would probably not change our beverage consumption.

    .

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    slider728 wrote: »
    I know exactly what county this is as I live nearby (outside of your county thankfully).

    If anyplace else in the nation implemented this tax, I might actually think they were doing this in the best interest of the public.

    Because of where it is, this is nothing but trying to generate another tax revenue stream. Personally, I am 100% against it in this case, just because I think the politicians are BSing about their reasons for the tax.

    Actually, they seem to be completely open about the fact it's for money raising, and I don't think anyone is in denial about that. When it got delayed because of the challenge, ALL the talk was about what that did to the budget.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    ccruz985 wrote: »
    If that's the case, water should be free.

    It's pretty close.

    No added cost if I get a glass of water from my tap.
  • Penthesilea514
    Penthesilea514 Posts: 1,189 Member
    Options
    Hmm I think if a whole country (like in the UK) does it vs. a county in the US, it will be different. Like people have mentioned, they would just go to the next county over (which is more realistic for some, but not all, people). A country wide tax? Maybe it would have more of an effect, but it likely won't change the minds of a huge number of people who really like their soda, so it's revenue. If it does have an effect (moreso in the UK with their health system), and it helps reduce financial burden of diabetes or obesity on the healthcare system, that is again money for the government (either through taxes or through cost reduction). Theoretically speaking of course, but I think the audience and implementation would be important to consider.

    I don't think it is too helpful (at this point) in the US, but who knows?
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
    Maybe not negligible, but perhaps not a significant enough effect to justify what they are putting retailers and restaurants through to implement this tax.

    Restaurants can't offer free refills of soda anymore, because it needs to be taxed by the ounce. Bars have to figure out exactly how much Coke is in their "Jack and Coke" and tax based on that. Does it matter how much of the glass is ice? It's just a little wacky and not really well thought out.

    Restaurants are losing money because they have to charge for something they used to give away for free and all their competition does too?
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Options
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »

    Would this tax discourage you from buying these beverages?

    No, given my income level.

    If I was poorer I would simply buy a cheaper alternative.

  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    We've had a soda tax for years where I live. All soda, regardless of type of sweetener.
  • SuzySunshine99
    SuzySunshine99 Posts: 2,984 Member
    Options
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    We've had a soda tax for years where I live. All soda, regardless of type of sweetener.

    Since you've had it for years, did they reach any conclusions on whether it was effective in curbing the consumption of these drinks?
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,576 Member
    Options
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    We've had a soda tax for years where I live. All soda, regardless of type of sweetener.

    Since you've had it for years, did they reach any conclusions on whether it was effective in curbing the consumption of these drinks?

    I have no idea. I'm not even sure if that's a reason they gave for enacting it. It's been so long IDK what reason they gave but I always suspected it was just a pleasure tax type thing.

    We have an alcohol tax too and that doesn't slow me down.

Categories