A new “junk food tax” is one idea the Nova Scotia Department of Finance is asking for your opinion on in its pre-budget consultations. Why? Well it seems the government thinks it may have found another way to separate you from your hard earned dollars.

 

According to the Department, the idea came up in last year’s consultation and they thought it deserved more discussion. As they put it: “participants came up with a number of good ideas for increasing government revenues. One suggestion that came up a number of times was the idea of creating a special Junk Food Tax.”

 

Proponents of a junk food tax say raising the costs of unhealthy food forces you to pick a healthier alternative, which will ultimately reduce obesity in Nova Scotia.

 

And how much will this food tax cost you?  According to a report by the RAND Corporation, a California based think thank, it would take a 10 percent tax to turn around obesity rates. In Nova Scotia, a 10 percent food tax would be on top of the existing 15 percent HST.  In other words, the government’s take, should you choose to binge on the forbidden candied apple would be a whopping 25 percent!

 

Should the government impose even a hefty 10 percent tax, studies show that it would take 20-30 years before there would be any difference in obesity rates – if there is any effect at all.  Of course, the government won’t have to wait that long for it to see the results it really wants – swelling coffers.

 

The sheer size of the tax won’t deter the do-gooder supporters from pushing this on Nova Scotians. Sin taxes, like those on tobacco and alcohol, they claim proved useful in reducing consumption rates and improving health.

 

But smoking and drinking are not things people need to live -- food we need.

 

The worst part of a food tax is that it would hurt the poorest the most. The greatest consumers of ‘junk food’ are lower income families. Fast food is often less expensive than fresh and organic choices. Moreover, it’s often the only thing a busy mother has time to feed her family when she’s running from one commitment to the next. This tax will hit those who can least afford it the hardest.

 

As far as sins go, indulging in the occasional fatty treat isn’t that bad. The dangers of secondhand smoke have in recent years made smokers much despised and the evils of alcohol abuse have long been recognized.  By contrast, people who eat junk food are really only hurting themselves so the targeting of the behaviour by government is less justifiable.

 

In order to put this tax in place, the government would have to decide what it considers “junk” food. A hamburger, for example, is high in fat but also high in protein -- so does it attract the tax or not? What if it’s on a whole wheat bun or made with lean ground beef? This debate over what is “healthy” would launch a massive lobby effort by individual food processors wishing to void the surtax and the stigma of being labeled “junk”. Do we really want lobbyists and government deciding what is healthy for us?

 

In any event, food tax supporters are simply using healthy living as veil for what this tax is really all about: a tax grab for the government based on the belief that you cannot make the right decisions and the government needs to make them for you.

 

Pierre Trudeau famously said that the “government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.” With our government wanting to control every aspect of our lives, including what we eat, seems Mr. Trudeau might have wanted to add that the government doesn’t belong in our kitchens either.