The impact of the French soda tax on prices and purchases. An ex post evaluation

Autoři: Sara Capacci aff001;  Olivier Allais aff002;  Celine Bonnet aff003;  Mario Mazzocchi aff001
Působiště autorů: Affiliation Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy aff001;  Affiliation Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), UR1303 ALISS, Ivry-sur-Seine, France aff002;  Affiliation Toulouse School of Economics, University of Toulouse Capitole, Toulouse, France aff003
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article


We estimate the price and consumption effects of the 2012 French tax on sweetened non-alcoholic drinks using a difference-in-difference approach. Our identification strategy exploits Italian data as a natural control group. We use French and Italian Consumer Price Indices, purchase prices and quantities from the 2011 and 2012 Kantar and GfK home-scan surveys for two French regions and two neighbouring Italian regions, and expenditure data from the 2011 and 2012 Italian Expenditure Survey. We check for the robustness of our results by applying the difference-in-difference models using only French data and considering water as the benchmark (control) good. We find that the tax is transmitted to the prices of taxed drinks, with full transmission for soft drinks and partial transmission for fruit juices. The evidence on purchase responses is mixed and less robust, indicating at most a very small reduction in soft drink purchases (about half a litre per capita per year), an impact which would be consistent with the low tax rate. We find suggestive evidence of a larger response by the sub-sample of heavy purchasers. Fruit juices and water do not seem to have been affected by the tax.

Klíčová slova:

Beverages – Diet – France – Italian people – Italy – Spring – Surface water – Taxes


1. Chriqui JF, Eidson SS, Chaloupka FJ. State Sales Taxes on Regular Soda (as of January 2014). Bridging the Gap Program, Health Policy Center, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago; 2014. Available from:

2. Paarlberg R, Micha R, Mozaffarian D. Can US Local Soda Taxes Continue to Spread? Food Policy. 2017;71:1–7.

3. Guerrero-López CM, Unar-Munguía M, Colchero MA. Price elasticity of the demand for soft drinks, other sugar-sweetened beverages and energy dense food in Chile. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4098-x 28183287

4. Colchero MA, Rivera-Dommarco J, Popkin BM, Ng SW. In Mexico, Evidence Of Sustained Consumer Response Two Years After Implementing A Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax. Health Affairs. 2017;36(3):564–571. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1231 28228484

5. Briggs AD, Mytton OT, Kehlbacher A, Tiffin R, Rayner M, Scarborough P. Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and comparative risk assessment modelling study. British Medical Journal. 2013;347:f6189. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f6189 24179043

6. Mytton OT, Clarke D, Rayner M. Taxing unhealthy food and drinks to improve health. British Medical Journal. 2012;344:e2931. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2931 22589522

7. Fletcher JM, Frisvold D, Tefft N. Can soft drink taxes reduce population weight? Contemporary Economic Policy. 2010;28(1):23–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1465-7287.2009.00182.x 20657817

8. WHO. Fiscal policies for diet and prevention of noncommunicable diseases: technical meeting report, 5-6 May 2015, Geneva, Switzerland. WHO; 2016.

9. Cornelsen L, Mazzocchi M, Green R, Dangour AD, Smith RD. Estimating the Relationship between Food Prices and Food Consumption—Methods Matter. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. 2016;38(3):546–561. doi: 10.1093/aepp/ppw010

10. Redondo M, Hernandez-Aguado I, Lumbreras B. The impact of the tax on sweetened beverages: a systematic review. The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2018;108(3);548–563. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqy135 30535085

11. Colchero MA, Salgado JC, Unar-Munguía M, Molina M, Ng S, Rivera-Dommarco JA. Changes in prices after an excise tax to sweetened sugar beverages was implemented in Mexico: evidence from urban areas. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(12):e0144408. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144408 26675166

12. Caro JC, Corvalan C, Reyes M, Silva A, Popkin B, Smith Taillie L. Chile’s 2014 sugar-sweetened beverage tax and changes in prices and purchases of sugarsweetened beverages: An observational study in an urban environment. PLoS medicine. 2018;15(7):e1002597. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002597 29969444

13. Nakamura R, Mirelman AJ, Cuadrado C, Silva-Illanes N, Dunstan J, Suhrcke M. Evaluating the 2014 sugar-sweetened beverage tax in Chile: an observational study in urban areas. PLoS medicine. 2018;15(7):e1002596. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002596 29969456

14. Falbe J, Thompson HR, Becker CM, Rojas N, McCulloch CE, Madsen KA. Impact of the Berkeley excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. American Journal of Public Health. 2016;106(10):1865–1871. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2016.303362 27552267

15. Silver LD, Ng SW, Ryan-Ibarra S, Taillie LS, Induni M, Miles DR, et al. 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. 2017;14(4):e1002283. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002283 28419108

16. Cawley J, Frisvold D, Hill A, Jones D. The Impact of the Philadelphia Beverage Tax on Purchases and Consumption by Adults and Children. National Bureau of Economic Research. 2018;No w25052.

17. Roberto CA, Lawman HG, LeVasseur MT, Mitra N, Peterhans A, Herring B, Bleich SN. 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. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2019;321(18):1799–1810. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.4249 31087022

18. Berardi N, Sevestre P, Tépaut M, Vigneron A. The impact of a ‘soda tax’ on prices: evidence from French micro data. Applied Economics. 2016;48(41):3976–3994. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2016.1150946

19. Etilé F, Lecocq S, Boizot-Szantai C. The Incidence of Soft-Drink Taxes on Consumer Prices and Welfare: Evidence from the French Soda Tax; 2018.

20. Bonnet C, Réquillart V. Impact of cost shocks on consumer prices in vertically-related markets: the case of the French soft drink market. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 2013;95(5):1088–1108. doi: 10.1093/ajae/aat055

21. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service. France to tax soft drinks—U.S. Companies to pay the most. GAIN Report (Global Agricultural Information Network); 2011. FR9077.

22. Deaton A. Quality, quantity, and spatial variation of price. The American Economic Review. 1988;78(3):418–430.

23. Crawford I, Laisney F, Preston I. Estimation of household demand systems with theoretically compatible Engel curves and unit value specifications. Journal of Econometrics. 2003;114(2):221–241. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00083-6

24. Becker GS, Murphy KM. A theory of rational addiction. Journal of Political Economy. 1988;96(4):675–700. doi: 10.1086/261558

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 10
Nejčtenější tento týden