Proposed hike in excise duty on soft drinks

Surely, he is not going to put extra taxes on Diet Coke, Pepsi Max etc?

He would be better to cut the fat in his own department.

If he wants additional revenue - what about a mansions tax?

Or do away with tax breaks for big houses?
 
Reminds me of the story about NYC Mayor Bloomberg's ban on 32oz drink 'cups'.

Also a stupid idea.
 
bazermc said:
Fizzy drinks are not subject to excise duty in the first place, so how does he propose increasing something that doesnt exist in the first place.
Click to expand...

Looks to me like a case of a lazy/ignorant journo who doesnt understand what exicise duty is.

The [broken link removed]article appears to be based on the same press release but without the lazy journo howlers!

Interesting paper (pdf) from Irish Dental Association on "Sugar Tax".
 
T McGibney said:
and let our heritage properties fall down?
Click to expand...

or perhaps let those on ministerial salaries (and eventually those gold plated pensions) and who have been involved in numerous property development schemes pay for their own home's upkeep!!!
 
I find it crazy that people from the ESRI can spend time advocating this type of tax when the ESRI should have been issuing warnings uring the boom.

Is this what the ESRI are reduced to?

As for Heritage pads - If they can't afford the upkeep - can they not take out a loan.

THats what they are advocing for students.
 
There is no excuse to raise tax in our broke country.

A simple cut of 10% across the board for all social welfare payouts, and public sector pay and pensions would do a power of good. That Croke Park Agreement, and all the National Program for this and that has a lot to answer for.
 
Hearld.ie article

By Michael Lavery

Tuesday November 13 2012


I imagine that Hearld Journalist will get around to correcting his article about an "excise hike" on soft drinks by the next news cycle.


In the meantime the actual report might be published and we can all have a read of what it says.
 
celebtastic said:
There is no excuse to raise tax in our broke country.

A simple cut of 10% across the board for all social welfare payouts, and public sector pay and pensions would do a power of good. That Croke Park Agreement, and all the National Program for this and that has a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...

A cut of 10% across the board - " simple " , good luck with that !
 
ajapale said:
Looks to me like a case of a lazy/ignorant journo who doesnt understand what exicise duty is.

The [broken link removed]article appears to be based on the same press release but without the lazy journo howlers!

Interesting paper (pdf) from Irish Dental Association on "Sugar Tax".
Click to expand...

The newstalk article repeats that it's an "increase" in excise duty, so no marks for them.
 
In fairness the IBEC press release does not contain any blatant inaccuracies.

Sugar tax would hit consumers and have no health benefits

Tuesday, 13 November 2012
Food and Drink Industry Ireland (FDII) the IBEC group that represents the food and beverage sector, today warned that imposing a discriminatory tax on certain food and drink products would have no health benefits and would further hit already hard-pressed Irish consumers. It said such an initiative was recently introduced in Denmark, but has now been reversed as authorities found it did not change consumer behaviour, but instead led to higher inflation and an increase in cross-border shopping.

Commenting on the issue, FDII Director Paul Kelly said: "Fiscal measures specifically aimed at altering behaviour are complex to design and can be highly unpredictable. Ireland already imposes high taxes on many foods. While most foods are exempt from VAT, the standard rate of 23% applies to confectionary items like sweets, chocolate, crisps, ice-cream and soft drinks. An additional tax on sugar or soft drinks would leave Irish consumers out of pocket, paying one of the highest tax rates in Europe. The impact would be highly regressive, with a disproportionate impact on low-income families that spend a higher proportion of income on food.

“This flawed approach has been recognised by the Danish Government, which over the weekend announced it was withdrawing a saturated fat tax after one year and was also scrapping proposals for a sugar tax because of concerns about inflation, cross-border trade and the risk to jobs. The Danish Food Minister Mette Gjerskov said, "Now we need to try to do something else to address public health."

"The Irish food and drink industry is fully committed to playing its role in helping to tackle obesity and other relevant public health issues. However, the obesity issue will not be resolved by taxation or other forms of discriminatory legislation aimed at individual food categories. An evidence based holistic approach is necessary, which should include measures such as reformulation, consumer awareness, the promotion of physical activity, and workplace and school well-being programmes."
Click to expand...
 
celebtastic said:
There is no excuse to raise tax in our broke country.

A simple cut of 10% across the board for all social welfare payouts, and public sector pay and pensions would do a power of good. That Croke Park Agreement, and all the National Program for this and that has a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...

Are you in receipt of a social welfare payment, a public sector salary or a pension?

If not, am I right in suggesting that your solution = let someone else pay...
 
If they want to put tax on carbonated drinks then let them do it and let them tell us they are doing it because they need the revenue.
But don't try and sell it to us as a way of increasing health in the population because it won't.

At least they should have the balls to be honest with regard to why they are doing it.

How many jobs were created from the money taken from peoples private pensions which the government said would be used for job creation?
 
celebtastic said:
There is no excuse to raise tax in our broke country.

A simple cut of 10% across the board for all social welfare payouts, and public sector pay and pensions would do a power of good. That Croke Park Agreement, and all the National Program for this and that has a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...

What a well analysed and insightful point of view.
 
The_Banker said:
At least they should have the balls to be honest with regard to why they are doing it.
Click to expand...

I agree. I'd respect a decision more if it waters weren't muddied. The contempt they show for the population by masquerading this as a decision based on health is a disgrace.

Reminds me of a simpsons episode -"Bart to the Future" Lisa is now US President. They've sold the "purple mountain majesties and amber waves of grain", among other properties that they do not even own, but still rely on foreign aid from Europe and China. Lisa and her advisors decide to impose a massive tax hike, agreeing to call it a "temporary refund adjustment" so the public don't catch on.

The_Banker said:
How many jobs were created from the money taken from peoples private pensions which the government said would be used for job creation?
Click to expand...

Good question. As a forced emigrant I'd especially like to know. It's be nice to get a job back home again.
 
[broken link removed]

Has the secret report by the "Institute of Public Health", been published yet?

Does anyone know who the authors of the secret report are?

I heard a report on RTE radio 1 yesterday evening on drivetime where the journalist referred to reports by the same research team.

Who is "Institute of Public Health" what is its function and who funds it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top