IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ehbiol/v37y2020ics1570677x19301716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of implicit and explicit taxes on the purchasing of ‘high-in-calorie’ products: A randomized controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Doble, Brett
  • Ang Jia Ler, Felicia
  • Finkelstein, Eric A.

Abstract

Public health taxes on less healthy food and beverage products have been shown to be effective in various settings. However, it is unclear if observed reductions in the quantity of taxed products purchased is a result of price increases due to the tax or the accompanying messaging and if the effects are influenced by the level of support for such taxes within the population. 941 adults residing in Singapore were randomized and asked to shop in one of four versions of a fully functional on-line experimental grocery store: 1) no tax control; 2) implicit tax showing only post-tax prices (i.e., 20 % higher than control prices) on high-in-calorie products; 3) fake tax showing pre-tax prices and a label falsely indicating that the price includes a 20 % tax on high-in-calorie products; and 4) explicit tax showing the same label as in 3) and an actual 20 % price increase applied to the high-in-calorie products. The proportion of high-in-calorie products purchased was 14 % in the control arm. We were unable to reject the null hypothesis of no effect in the implicit tax arm compared to control (0.08, 95 % CI −3.31 to 1.77) or in the fake tax arm compared to the control (2.59, 95 % CI −5.04 to 0.00) but observed a statistically significant 3.35 percentage point decrease (95 % CI −6.01 to −0.5) in the explicit tax arm compared to control. We were unable to reject the null hypothesis of no effect in any of the outcomes related to diet quality. Individuals who support the tax showed greater responsiveness to the explicit and fake taxes compared to those who do not (price elasticities of demand of −1.38 and −0.51 respectively). Results suggest that reductions in the proportions of high-in-calorie products purchased may be largely attributable to explicit messaging rather than to price increases. However, even when effective, policymakers should recognize that changes in purchasing patterns may not improve diet quality and that results may not generalize to other areas where levels of support differ.

Suggested Citation

  • Doble, Brett & Ang Jia Ler, Felicia & Finkelstein, Eric A., 2020. "The effect of implicit and explicit taxes on the purchasing of ‘high-in-calorie’ products: A randomized controlled trial," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ehbiol:v:37:y:2020:i:c:s1570677x19301716
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ehb.2020.100860
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X19301716
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ehb.2020.100860?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jay Bhattacharya & Neeraj Sood, 2011. "Who Pays for Obesity?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(1), pages 139-158, Winter.
    2. Jakina Debnam, 2017. "Selection Effects and Heterogeneous Demand Responses to the Berkeley Soda Tax Vote," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1172-1187.
    3. Matthew Rabin & Ted O'Donoghue, 1999. "Doing It Now or Later," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 103-124, March.
    4. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    5. David R. Just & Andrew S. Hanks, 2015. "The Hidden Cost of Regulation: Emotional Responses to Command and Control," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1385-1399.
    6. Lin, Biing-Hwan & Smith, Travis A. & Lee, Jonq-Ying & Hall, Kevin D., 2011. "Measuring weight outcomes for obesity intervention strategies: The case of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 329-341.
    7. Andreyeva, T. & Long, M.W. & Brownell, K.D., 2010. "The impact of food prices on consumption: A systematic review of research on the price elasticity of demand for food," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(2), pages 216-222.
    8. Laurent Muller & Anne Lacroix & Jayson L. Lusk & Bernard Ruffieux, 2017. "Distributional Impacts of Fat Taxes and Thin Subsidies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(604), pages 2066-2092, September.
    9. Colchero, M.A. & Salgado, J.C. & Unar-Munguía, M. & Hernández-Ávila, M. & Rivera-Dommarco, J.A., 2015. "Price elasticity of the demand for sugar sweetened beverages and soft drinks in Mexico," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 129-137.
    10. Amy Finkelstein, 2009. "E-ztax: Tax Salience and Tax Rates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(3), pages 969-1010.
    11. Jay Bhattacharya & Darius Lakdawalla, 2004. "Time-Inconsistency and Welfare," NBER Working Papers 10345, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Linda J Cobiac & King Tam & Lennert Veerman & Tony Blakely, 2017. "Taxes and Subsidies for Improving Diet and Population Health in Australia: A Cost-Effectiveness Modelling Study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-18, February.
    13. Lynn D Silver & Shu Wen Ng & Suzanne Ryan-Ibarra & Lindsey Smith Taillie & Marta Induni & Donna R Miles & Jennifer M Poti & Barry M Popkin, 2017. "Changes in prices, sales, consumer spending, and beverage consumption one year after a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in Berkeley, California, US: A before-and-after study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, April.
    14. Papke, Leslie E & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M, 1996. "Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(K) Plan Participation Rates," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(6), pages 619-632, Nov.-Dec..
    15. Alastair J. Fischer, 2014. "Some Comments on "Taxes, Subsidies, and Advertising Efficacy in Changing Eating Behavior: An Experimental Study"," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 36(4), pages 717-721.
    16. David M Studdert & Jordan Flanders & Michelle M Mello, 2015. "Searching for Public Health Law’s Sweet Spot: The Regulation of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-10, July.
    17. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    18. Laurent Muller & Anne Lacroix & Jayson L. Lusk & Bernard Ruffieux, 2017. "Distributional Impacts of Fat Taxes and Thin Subsidies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(604), pages 2066-2092, September.
    19. Ryota Nakamura & Andrew J Mirelman & Cristóbal Cuadrado & Nicolas Silva-Illanes & Jocelyn Dunstan & Marc Suhrcke, 2018. "Evaluating the 2014 sugar-sweetened beverage tax in Chile: An observational study in urban areas," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-22, July.
    20. Selin Atalay & Margaret G. Meloy, 2011. "Retail therapy: A strategic effort to improve mood," Post-Print hal-00596836, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bercholz, Maxime & Ng, Shu Wen & Stacey, Nicholas & Swart, Elizabeth C., 2022. "Decomposing consumer and producer effects on sugar from beverage purchases after a sugar-based tax on beverages in South Africa," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel John Zizzo & Melanie Parravano & Ryota Nakamura & Suzanna Forwood & Marc Suhrcke, 2021. "The impact of taxation and signposting on diet: an online field study with breakfast cereals and soft drinks," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1294-1324, December.
    2. Tasoff, Joshua & Letzler, Robert, 2014. "Everyone believes in redemption: Nudges and overoptimism in costly task completion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 107-122.
    3. Blumkin, Tomer & Ruffle, Bradley J. & Ganun, Yosef, 2012. "Are income and consumption taxes ever really equivalent? Evidence from a real-effort experiment with real goods," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1200-1219.
    4. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    5. Hu, Jiafei & Megalokonomou, Rigissa & Yuan, Haishan, 2020. "How do parents respond to regulation of sugary drinks in child care? Evidence from California," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 672-687.
    6. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. J. M. Bauer & L. A. Reisch, 2019. "Behavioural Insights and (Un)healthy Dietary Choices: a Review of Current Evidence," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 3-45, March.
    8. Sunjin Ahn & Jayson L. Lusk, 2021. "Non‐Pecuniary Effects of Sugar‐Sweetened Beverage Policies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 53-69, January.
    9. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2009. "Beyond Revealed Preference: Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 51-104.
    10. Juan Carlos Caro & Pourya Valizadeh & Alejandrina Correa & Andres Silva & Shu Wen Ng, 2020. "Combined fiscal policies to promote healthier diets: Effects on purchases and consumer welfare," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, January.
    11. Haeck, Catherine & Lawson, Nicholas & Poirier, Krystel, 2022. "Estimating consumer preferences for different beverages using the BLP approach," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    12. Linda Thunström, 2019. "Welfare effects of nudges: The emotional tax of calorie menu labeling," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(1), pages 11-25, January.
    13. James Alm & Carolyn J. Bourdeaux, 2013. "Applying Behavioral Economics to the Public Sector," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 206(3), pages 91-134, September.
    14. Finkelstein, Eric A. & Zhen, Chen & Bilger, Marcel & Nonnemaker, James & Farooqui, Assad M. & Todd, Jessica E., 2013. "Implications of a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax when substitutions to non-beverage items are considered," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 219-239.
    15. Kirgios, Erika L. & Mandel, Graelin H. & Park, Yeji & Milkman, Katherine L. & Gromet, Dena M. & Kay, Joseph S. & Duckworth, Angela L., 2020. "Teaching temptation bundling to boost exercise: A field experiment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(S), pages 20-35.
    16. Paolo Crosetto & Laurent Muller & Bernard Ruffieux, 2024. "Label or taxes: why not both? Testing nutritional mixed policies in the lab," Working Papers 2024-01, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:11-25 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Vincenzina Caputo & Jayson L. Lusk, 2020. "What agricultural and food policies do U.S. consumers prefer? A best–worst scaling approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 75-93, January.
    19. George Loewenstein & Zachary Wojtowicz, 2023. "The Economics of Attention," CESifo Working Paper Series 10712, CESifo.
    20. Alberto Gago & Xavier Labandeira & Xiral López Otero, 2014. "A Panorama on Energy Taxes and Green Tax Reforms," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 208(1), pages 145-190, March.
    21. Jakina Debnam, 2017. "Selection Effects and Heterogeneous Demand Responses to the Berkeley Soda Tax Vote," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1172-1187.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ehbiol:v:37:y:2020:i:c:s1570677x19301716. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622964 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.