Taxation on ultra-processed foods to trim obesity: Is it plausible in Canada?

As the prevalence of excess body weight has become normalized in Canadian society, this paper argues for implementation of a sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) and high saturated fat (SF) food taxation in Canada. These harmful foods and beverages are associated with excess calorie intake, lower nutrient intake, and a rise in body mass index. As the waistlines of Canadians continue to grow, it is of utmost importance for obesity and overweight to be externally managed by the government with taxation on unhealthy substances, and a simultaneous subsidy on healthier alternatives. Potentially pairing SSB/SF taxation with a fruits and vegetables subsidy could be one of the most effective means of achieving altered consumption patterns. The purpose is to curb availability of the former, increase consumption of the latter, and reduce weight gain and the harms that come along with it (e.g. metabolic disease and type II diabetes). The paper’s analysis focuses on children, adolescents (12-17 years old), and lower socioeconomic status populations, as these populations are at a higher risk for overweight and obesity and would be most positively affected by the proposed taxation and subsidy. Briefly outlining the options governments have in reducing the levels of SSB/SF, questions are posed for future research regarding the area of ultra-processed food taxations. Finally, notable objections to SSB/SF taxation are considered and alternative methods are suggested such as income-based subsidy programs, which address inequitable distributions of proposed taxation on vulnerable groups like children, adolescents, and lower socioeconomic status groups. Taxation on ultra-processed foods to trim obesity: Is it plausible in Canada?

per the United Nation's Nova food classification system, are "not modified foods, but formulations made mostly or entirely from substances derived from foods and additives, with little if any intact [unprocessed or minimally processed foods]" (Monteiro et al., 2017, p. 9;Moubarac et al., 2014).
Further, ultra-processed foods are often sugared, lack nutrients, are energy dense, and include more salt, sugars, fats, and oils than unprocessed foods Moubarac, Batal, Louzada, Steele, & Monteiro, 2017;Moubarac et al., 2014). The highest increases in obesity have occurred in classes II and III 3 (Twells, Gregory, Reddigan, & Midodzi, 2014), with nearly 60 percent of Canadian adults and one-third of children and adolescents overweight or obese .
Further, current data show nearly 1 in 7 Canadian children are exclusively obese (Rao et al., 2016).
This alarming rise in obesity rates over the past 40 years can largely be attributed to unhealthy diets coupled with sedentary lifestyles . It is safe to say the prevalence of excess body weight has become normalized in Canadian society, made clear by the fact that the average body mass index sits in the overweight category at 26-27 kg/m 2 (Ogilvie & Eggleton, 2016).
Research has abundantly shown that obesity is linked to numerous comorbidities such as metabolic disease, coronary heart disease, type II diabetes, and sleep apnea (Haslam, 2007;Ogilvie & Eggleton, 2016 they can lead to habit-forming and quasi-addictive consumption, making healthy food choices more difficult to select (Millar, 2013;Monteiro et al., 2017;Moss, 2014). These products are consistently shown to be associated with excess calorie intake, lower nutrient intake, lower overall diet quality (Wang et al., 2015), and a rise in body mass index (Maniadakis, Kapaki, Damianidi, & Kourlaba, 2013;Sturm, Powell, Chriqui, & Chaloupka, 2010). The addictive combination of salt, sugar, and fat in ultra-processed foods have clearly done their jobs as Canadian household food purchases since 1938 have shifted from predominantly unprocessed foods to ultra-processed foods (Moubarac et al., 2014).
To implement taxation on ultra-processed foods, particularly SSB and SF, Canadian law-makers and health practitioners will have to learn from  for those who wish to utilize the programs.

Oppositional view of taxation
Building off an income-based tax and subsidy program, another way it could be implemented is by combining income-based and province-based. administer, opponents worry that provinces with lower rates of obesity may not reallocate funds in obesity-treatment and prevention avenues (Buhler et al., 2013) 6 . This raises a valid concern regarding inequitable distributions of a proposed taxation.
Another key opposition to taxation of ultraprocessed foods is that a 'nanny state' would ensue, where governments control substantial portions of its citizens' behaviours and restrict their consumption choices (Buhler et al., 2013).
Because of this, consumers may engage in adverse substitution effects like other SSB/SF substances or jurisdictions (as happened in Denmark) that may be worse than the original commodities (Bødker et al., 2015). My rebuttal to this valid concern is that having government recognition (via subsidies and taxation) shows that the health of current and future populations is an important priority for policy makers (Olstad et al., 2017). Another way of looking at government intervention is that it is the government's responsibility to protect the public's health from harmful substances, most of which are produced by multi-national conglomerates (Moodie et al., 2013). Nonetheless, there exist substantial conflicts of interest between the food corporations producing ultra-processed foods and the governments tasked with regulating said products.

Final remarks
Like tobacco, alcohol, and seat belt use, SSB/ SF taxation will likely only be implemented after numerous failures of the corresponding industries to problem-solve via self-regulation (Moodie et al., 2013). As a society, however, we desperately need to halt the comorbidities that arise from the overconsumption of SSB and SF. This is especially true in children and adolescents; whose diets compose of up to 55 percent ultra-processed foods (Moubarac et al., 2017) with 10 to 15 percent of calorie intake coming from SSB (Franck et al., 2013). Because of the staggering data, the need for an immediate nation-wide governmental taxation is evident, despite data about the use of taxes to curb consumption of SSB/SF being in its infancy.
Although there are both positives and negatives for a proposed taxation in Canada, there is by no means a consensus on the topic in public, academic, and healthcare settings. As with the implementation of GST in 1991, Canadians will be resistant to a SSB/SF taxation, however, this too can subside and become integrated into society.
As can be seen from the failed Danish fat-tax that lasted a mere 15 months, food corporations are resistant and willing to take legal action against governments that impose restrictions on their consumers (Bødker et al., 2015).