Loading…
Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting
IMPORTANCE: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce). OBJECTIVES: To compare changes in beverage prices...
Saved in:
Published in: | JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association 2019-05, Vol.321 (18), p.1799-1810 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a489t-adea7a6899534fea7b6bd21ad2b59c721b590d30e63d7f6a1661b3ddac25d6d3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a489t-adea7a6899534fea7b6bd21ad2b59c721b590d30e63d7f6a1661b3ddac25d6d3 |
container_end_page | 1810 |
container_issue | 18 |
container_start_page | 1799 |
container_title | JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association |
container_volume | 321 |
creator | Roberto, Christina A Lawman, Hannah G LeVasseur, Michael T Mitra, Nandita Peterhans, Ana Herring, Bradley Bleich, Sara N |
description | IMPORTANCE: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce). OBJECTIVES: To compare changes in beverage prices and sales following the implementation of the tax in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore, Maryland (a control city without a tax) and to assess potential cross-border shopping to avoid the tax in neighboring zip codes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used a difference-in-differences approach and analyzed sales data to compare changes between January 1, 2016, before the tax, and December 31, 2017, after the tax. Differences by store type, beverage sweetener status, and beverage size were examined. The commercial retailer sales data included large chain store sales in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Pennsylvania zip codes bordering Philadelphia. These data reflect approximately 25% of the ounces of taxed beverages sold in Philadelphia. EXPOSURES: Philadelphia’s tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Change in taxed beverage prices and volume sales. RESULTS: A total of 291 stores (54 supermarkets, 20 mass merchandise stores, 217 pharmacies) were analyzed. The mean price per ounce of taxed beverages in Philadelphia increased from 5.43 cents in 2016 to 6.24 cents in 2017 at supermarkets; from 5.28 cents to 6.24 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.60 cents to 8.28 cents at pharmacies. The mean price per ounce in Baltimore increased from 5.33 cents in 2016 to 5.50 cents in 2017 at supermarkets, from 6.34 cents to 6.52 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.76 cents to 6.93 cents at pharmacies. The mean per-ounce difference in price between the 2 cities was 0.65 cents (95% CI, 0.60 cents-0.69 cents; P |
doi_str_mv | 10.1001/jama.2019.4249 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6518342</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ama_id>2733208</ama_id><sourcerecordid>2230831625</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a489t-adea7a6899534fea7b6bd21ad2b59c721b590d30e63d7f6a1661b3ddac25d6d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkk2P0zAQhiMEYsvClQMHZIkLlxR_JXYuSKXiS6oEokUcrUnstK5SZ7Gdhf1N_Elsut0FJCR8GXvmmVcz1lsUjwmeE4zJiz0cYE4xaeac8uZOMSMVkyWrGnm3mGHcyFJwyc-KByHscTqEifvFGSNYCkzprPixCGHsLEQ7OjT2CNArc2k8bA3awHeUkutpC75cfzMmGmc0AqfRwkfb29Q2DFfotnRqDeiLjTu03IHLD-tuRT9626VUFlnDkG8xcwn5ZCLYwfhfPKAV-IR_9i2kEUyM1m0fFvd6GIJ5dB3Pi82b15vlu3L14e375WJVApdNLEEbEFDLpqkY79O9rVtNCWjaVk0nKEkBa4ZNzbToayB1TVqmNXS00rVm58XLo-zF1B6M7oyLHgZ14e0B_JUawao_K87u1Ha8VHVFJOM0CTy_FvDj18mEqA42dGYYwJlxCopyTiXnlfgPlDLSNFJQkdBnf6H7cfIufUSmsGSkplWi5keq82MI3vQ3cxOssmNUdozKjlHZManh6e_b3uAniyTgyRHIfacqFQLLtO0_iozRNNBP8ibPbQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2230831625</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>American Medical Association Journals</source><creator>Roberto, Christina A ; Lawman, Hannah G ; LeVasseur, Michael T ; Mitra, Nandita ; Peterhans, Ana ; Herring, Bradley ; Bleich, Sara N</creator><creatorcontrib>Roberto, Christina A ; Lawman, Hannah G ; LeVasseur, Michael T ; Mitra, Nandita ; Peterhans, Ana ; Herring, Bradley ; Bleich, Sara N</creatorcontrib><description>IMPORTANCE: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce). OBJECTIVES: To compare changes in beverage prices and sales following the implementation of the tax in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore, Maryland (a control city without a tax) and to assess potential cross-border shopping to avoid the tax in neighboring zip codes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used a difference-in-differences approach and analyzed sales data to compare changes between January 1, 2016, before the tax, and December 31, 2017, after the tax. Differences by store type, beverage sweetener status, and beverage size were examined. The commercial retailer sales data included large chain store sales in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Pennsylvania zip codes bordering Philadelphia. These data reflect approximately 25% of the ounces of taxed beverages sold in Philadelphia. EXPOSURES: Philadelphia’s tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Change in taxed beverage prices and volume sales. RESULTS: A total of 291 stores (54 supermarkets, 20 mass merchandise stores, 217 pharmacies) were analyzed. The mean price per ounce of taxed beverages in Philadelphia increased from 5.43 cents in 2016 to 6.24 cents in 2017 at supermarkets; from 5.28 cents to 6.24 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.60 cents to 8.28 cents at pharmacies. The mean price per ounce in Baltimore increased from 5.33 cents in 2016 to 5.50 cents in 2017 at supermarkets, from 6.34 cents to 6.52 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.76 cents to 6.93 cents at pharmacies. The mean per-ounce difference in price between the 2 cities was 0.65 cents (95% CI, 0.60 cents-0.69 cents; P<.001) at supermarkets; 0.87 cents (95 % CI, 0.72 cents-1.02 cents; P<.001) at mass merchandise stores, and 1.56 cents (95% CI, 1.50 cents-1.62 cents; P<.001) at pharmacies. Total volume sales of taxed beverages in Philadelphia decreased by 1.3 billion ounces (from 2.475 billion to 1.214 billion) or by 51.0% after tax implementation. Volume sales in the Pennsylvania border zip codes, however, increased by 308.2 million ounces (from 713.1 million to 1.021 billion), offsetting the decrease in Philadelphia's volume sales by 24.4%. In Philadelphia, beverage volume sales in ounces per 4-week period between before and after tax periods decreased from 4.85 million to 1.99 million at supermarkets, from 2.98 million to 1.72 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.16 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. In Baltimore, the beverage volume sales in ounces decreased from 2.83 million to 2.81 million at supermarkets, from 1.05 million to 1.00 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.14 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. This was a 58.7% reduction at supermarkets (difference-in-differences, −2.85 million ounces; 95% CI, −4.10 million to −1.60 million ounces; P < .001), 40.4% reduction at mass merchandise stores (difference-in-differences, −1.20 million ounces; 95% CI, −2.04 million to −0.36 million ounces; P = .001), and 12.6% reduction in pharmacies (difference-in-differences, −0.02 million ounces; 95% CI, −0.03 million to −0.01 million ounces; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In Philadelphia in 2017, the implementation of a beverage excise tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages was associated with significantly higher beverage prices and a significant and substantial decline in volume of taxed beverages sold. This decrease in taxed beverage sales volume was partially offset by increases in volume of sales in bordering areas.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0098-7484</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-3598</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.4249</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31087022</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Medical Association</publisher><subject>Artificial sweeteners ; Baltimore ; Beverages ; Beverages - economics ; Beverages - statistics & numerical data ; Borders ; Changes ; Cities ; Costs and Cost Analysis ; Data ; Dietary Sugars ; Excise taxes ; Government Regulation ; Humans ; Implementation ; Original Investigation ; Pharmacy ; Philadelphia ; Policy making ; Postal codes ; Prices ; Reduction ; Retail sales ; Retail stores ; Sales ; Sales taxes ; Sugar ; Supermarkets ; Sweetening Agents ; Taxation ; Taxes ; Urban areas</subject><ispartof>JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, 2019-05, Vol.321 (18), p.1799-1810</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Medical Association May 14, 2019</rights><rights>Copyright 2019 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a489t-adea7a6899534fea7b6bd21ad2b59c721b590d30e63d7f6a1661b3ddac25d6d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a489t-adea7a6899534fea7b6bd21ad2b59c721b590d30e63d7f6a1661b3ddac25d6d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,778,782,883,27849,27907,27908</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31087022$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Roberto, Christina A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawman, Hannah G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LeVasseur, Michael T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitra, Nandita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peterhans, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herring, Bradley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bleich, Sara N</creatorcontrib><title>Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting</title><title>JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association</title><addtitle>JAMA</addtitle><description>IMPORTANCE: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce). OBJECTIVES: To compare changes in beverage prices and sales following the implementation of the tax in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore, Maryland (a control city without a tax) and to assess potential cross-border shopping to avoid the tax in neighboring zip codes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used a difference-in-differences approach and analyzed sales data to compare changes between January 1, 2016, before the tax, and December 31, 2017, after the tax. Differences by store type, beverage sweetener status, and beverage size were examined. The commercial retailer sales data included large chain store sales in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Pennsylvania zip codes bordering Philadelphia. These data reflect approximately 25% of the ounces of taxed beverages sold in Philadelphia. EXPOSURES: Philadelphia’s tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Change in taxed beverage prices and volume sales. RESULTS: A total of 291 stores (54 supermarkets, 20 mass merchandise stores, 217 pharmacies) were analyzed. The mean price per ounce of taxed beverages in Philadelphia increased from 5.43 cents in 2016 to 6.24 cents in 2017 at supermarkets; from 5.28 cents to 6.24 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.60 cents to 8.28 cents at pharmacies. The mean price per ounce in Baltimore increased from 5.33 cents in 2016 to 5.50 cents in 2017 at supermarkets, from 6.34 cents to 6.52 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.76 cents to 6.93 cents at pharmacies. The mean per-ounce difference in price between the 2 cities was 0.65 cents (95% CI, 0.60 cents-0.69 cents; P<.001) at supermarkets; 0.87 cents (95 % CI, 0.72 cents-1.02 cents; P<.001) at mass merchandise stores, and 1.56 cents (95% CI, 1.50 cents-1.62 cents; P<.001) at pharmacies. Total volume sales of taxed beverages in Philadelphia decreased by 1.3 billion ounces (from 2.475 billion to 1.214 billion) or by 51.0% after tax implementation. Volume sales in the Pennsylvania border zip codes, however, increased by 308.2 million ounces (from 713.1 million to 1.021 billion), offsetting the decrease in Philadelphia's volume sales by 24.4%. In Philadelphia, beverage volume sales in ounces per 4-week period between before and after tax periods decreased from 4.85 million to 1.99 million at supermarkets, from 2.98 million to 1.72 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.16 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. In Baltimore, the beverage volume sales in ounces decreased from 2.83 million to 2.81 million at supermarkets, from 1.05 million to 1.00 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.14 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. This was a 58.7% reduction at supermarkets (difference-in-differences, −2.85 million ounces; 95% CI, −4.10 million to −1.60 million ounces; P < .001), 40.4% reduction at mass merchandise stores (difference-in-differences, −1.20 million ounces; 95% CI, −2.04 million to −0.36 million ounces; P = .001), and 12.6% reduction in pharmacies (difference-in-differences, −0.02 million ounces; 95% CI, −0.03 million to −0.01 million ounces; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In Philadelphia in 2017, the implementation of a beverage excise tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages was associated with significantly higher beverage prices and a significant and substantial decline in volume of taxed beverages sold. This decrease in taxed beverage sales volume was partially offset by increases in volume of sales in bordering areas.</description><subject>Artificial sweeteners</subject><subject>Baltimore</subject><subject>Beverages</subject><subject>Beverages - economics</subject><subject>Beverages - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Borders</subject><subject>Changes</subject><subject>Cities</subject><subject>Costs and Cost Analysis</subject><subject>Data</subject><subject>Dietary Sugars</subject><subject>Excise taxes</subject><subject>Government Regulation</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implementation</subject><subject>Original Investigation</subject><subject>Pharmacy</subject><subject>Philadelphia</subject><subject>Policy making</subject><subject>Postal codes</subject><subject>Prices</subject><subject>Reduction</subject><subject>Retail sales</subject><subject>Retail stores</subject><subject>Sales</subject><subject>Sales taxes</subject><subject>Sugar</subject><subject>Supermarkets</subject><subject>Sweetening Agents</subject><subject>Taxation</subject><subject>Taxes</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><issn>0098-7484</issn><issn>1538-3598</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkk2P0zAQhiMEYsvClQMHZIkLlxR_JXYuSKXiS6oEokUcrUnstK5SZ7Gdhf1N_Elsut0FJCR8GXvmmVcz1lsUjwmeE4zJiz0cYE4xaeac8uZOMSMVkyWrGnm3mGHcyFJwyc-KByHscTqEifvFGSNYCkzprPixCGHsLEQ7OjT2CNArc2k8bA3awHeUkutpC75cfzMmGmc0AqfRwkfb29Q2DFfotnRqDeiLjTu03IHLD-tuRT9626VUFlnDkG8xcwn5ZCLYwfhfPKAV-IR_9i2kEUyM1m0fFvd6GIJ5dB3Pi82b15vlu3L14e375WJVApdNLEEbEFDLpqkY79O9rVtNCWjaVk0nKEkBa4ZNzbToayB1TVqmNXS00rVm58XLo-zF1B6M7oyLHgZ14e0B_JUawao_K87u1Ha8VHVFJOM0CTy_FvDj18mEqA42dGYYwJlxCopyTiXnlfgPlDLSNFJQkdBnf6H7cfIufUSmsGSkplWi5keq82MI3vQ3cxOssmNUdozKjlHZManh6e_b3uAniyTgyRHIfacqFQLLtO0_iozRNNBP8ibPbQ</recordid><startdate>20190514</startdate><enddate>20190514</enddate><creator>Roberto, Christina A</creator><creator>Lawman, Hannah G</creator><creator>LeVasseur, Michael T</creator><creator>Mitra, Nandita</creator><creator>Peterhans, Ana</creator><creator>Herring, Bradley</creator><creator>Bleich, Sara N</creator><general>American Medical Association</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190514</creationdate><title>Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting</title><author>Roberto, Christina A ; Lawman, Hannah G ; LeVasseur, Michael T ; Mitra, Nandita ; Peterhans, Ana ; Herring, Bradley ; Bleich, Sara N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a489t-adea7a6899534fea7b6bd21ad2b59c721b590d30e63d7f6a1661b3ddac25d6d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Artificial sweeteners</topic><topic>Baltimore</topic><topic>Beverages</topic><topic>Beverages - economics</topic><topic>Beverages - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Borders</topic><topic>Changes</topic><topic>Cities</topic><topic>Costs and Cost Analysis</topic><topic>Data</topic><topic>Dietary Sugars</topic><topic>Excise taxes</topic><topic>Government Regulation</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implementation</topic><topic>Original Investigation</topic><topic>Pharmacy</topic><topic>Philadelphia</topic><topic>Policy making</topic><topic>Postal codes</topic><topic>Prices</topic><topic>Reduction</topic><topic>Retail sales</topic><topic>Retail stores</topic><topic>Sales</topic><topic>Sales taxes</topic><topic>Sugar</topic><topic>Supermarkets</topic><topic>Sweetening Agents</topic><topic>Taxation</topic><topic>Taxes</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Roberto, Christina A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawman, Hannah G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LeVasseur, Michael T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitra, Nandita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peterhans, Ana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herring, Bradley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bleich, Sara N</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Roberto, Christina A</au><au>Lawman, Hannah G</au><au>LeVasseur, Michael T</au><au>Mitra, Nandita</au><au>Peterhans, Ana</au><au>Herring, Bradley</au><au>Bleich, Sara N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting</atitle><jtitle>JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association</jtitle><addtitle>JAMA</addtitle><date>2019-05-14</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>321</volume><issue>18</issue><spage>1799</spage><epage>1810</epage><pages>1799-1810</pages><issn>0098-7484</issn><eissn>1538-3598</eissn><abstract>IMPORTANCE: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce). OBJECTIVES: To compare changes in beverage prices and sales following the implementation of the tax in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore, Maryland (a control city without a tax) and to assess potential cross-border shopping to avoid the tax in neighboring zip codes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study used a difference-in-differences approach and analyzed sales data to compare changes between January 1, 2016, before the tax, and December 31, 2017, after the tax. Differences by store type, beverage sweetener status, and beverage size were examined. The commercial retailer sales data included large chain store sales in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Pennsylvania zip codes bordering Philadelphia. These data reflect approximately 25% of the ounces of taxed beverages sold in Philadelphia. EXPOSURES: Philadelphia’s tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Change in taxed beverage prices and volume sales. RESULTS: A total of 291 stores (54 supermarkets, 20 mass merchandise stores, 217 pharmacies) were analyzed. The mean price per ounce of taxed beverages in Philadelphia increased from 5.43 cents in 2016 to 6.24 cents in 2017 at supermarkets; from 5.28 cents to 6.24 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.60 cents to 8.28 cents at pharmacies. The mean price per ounce in Baltimore increased from 5.33 cents in 2016 to 5.50 cents in 2017 at supermarkets, from 6.34 cents to 6.52 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.76 cents to 6.93 cents at pharmacies. The mean per-ounce difference in price between the 2 cities was 0.65 cents (95% CI, 0.60 cents-0.69 cents; P<.001) at supermarkets; 0.87 cents (95 % CI, 0.72 cents-1.02 cents; P<.001) at mass merchandise stores, and 1.56 cents (95% CI, 1.50 cents-1.62 cents; P<.001) at pharmacies. Total volume sales of taxed beverages in Philadelphia decreased by 1.3 billion ounces (from 2.475 billion to 1.214 billion) or by 51.0% after tax implementation. Volume sales in the Pennsylvania border zip codes, however, increased by 308.2 million ounces (from 713.1 million to 1.021 billion), offsetting the decrease in Philadelphia's volume sales by 24.4%. In Philadelphia, beverage volume sales in ounces per 4-week period between before and after tax periods decreased from 4.85 million to 1.99 million at supermarkets, from 2.98 million to 1.72 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.16 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. In Baltimore, the beverage volume sales in ounces decreased from 2.83 million to 2.81 million at supermarkets, from 1.05 million to 1.00 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.14 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. This was a 58.7% reduction at supermarkets (difference-in-differences, −2.85 million ounces; 95% CI, −4.10 million to −1.60 million ounces; P < .001), 40.4% reduction at mass merchandise stores (difference-in-differences, −1.20 million ounces; 95% CI, −2.04 million to −0.36 million ounces; P = .001), and 12.6% reduction in pharmacies (difference-in-differences, −0.02 million ounces; 95% CI, −0.03 million to −0.01 million ounces; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In Philadelphia in 2017, the implementation of a beverage excise tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages was associated with significantly higher beverage prices and a significant and substantial decline in volume of taxed beverages sold. This decrease in taxed beverage sales volume was partially offset by increases in volume of sales in bordering areas.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Medical Association</pub><pmid>31087022</pmid><doi>10.1001/jama.2019.4249</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0098-7484 |
ispartof | JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, 2019-05, Vol.321 (18), p.1799-1810 |
issn | 0098-7484 1538-3598 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6518342 |
source | PAIS Index; American Medical Association Journals |
subjects | Artificial sweeteners Baltimore Beverages Beverages - economics Beverages - statistics & numerical data Borders Changes Cities Costs and Cost Analysis Data Dietary Sugars Excise taxes Government Regulation Humans Implementation Original Investigation Pharmacy Philadelphia Policy making Postal codes Prices Reduction Retail sales Retail stores Sales Sales taxes Sugar Supermarkets Sweetening Agents Taxation Taxes Urban areas |
title | Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T08%3A36%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Association%20of%20a%20Beverage%20Tax%20on%20Sugar-Sweetened%20and%20Artificially%20Sweetened%20Beverages%20With%20Changes%20in%20Beverage%20Prices%20and%20Sales%20at%20Chain%20Retailers%20in%20a%20Large%20Urban%20Setting&rft.jtitle=JAMA%20:%20the%20journal%20of%20the%20American%20Medical%20Association&rft.au=Roberto,%20Christina%20A&rft.date=2019-05-14&rft.volume=321&rft.issue=18&rft.spage=1799&rft.epage=1810&rft.pages=1799-1810&rft.issn=0098-7484&rft.eissn=1538-3598&rft_id=info:doi/10.1001/jama.2019.4249&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2230831625%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a489t-adea7a6899534fea7b6bd21ad2b59c721b590d30e63d7f6a1661b3ddac25d6d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2230831625&rft_id=info:pmid/31087022&rfr_iscdi=true |