Skip to main content

Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes: the Potential for Cardiovascular Health


Purpose of Review

Global sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is high, with important implications for cardiovascular health. International momentum with the adoption and implementation of SSB taxes has been mounting in recent years, as has the evidence supporting such a policy for population health. In this review, we summarise the influence of regular SSB consumption on cardiovascular health and provide a global perspective on SSB consumption and SSB tax action and evidence. We further discuss the might and organised opposition of the beverage industry and the policy enablers for affirmative action.

Recent Findings

Compelling evidence demonstrates a link between regular SSB consumption and adverse cardiovascular health. Although global SSB consumption appears to be declining slightly, consumption remains high. Forty-five jurisdictions around the world have now implemented a notable tax on SSBs and consistent evidence demonstrates the effectiveness of this policy at reducing the purchase or consumption of SSBs at the population level. However, the political influence of industry remains a major barrier to further action. Enablers to policy action include the realisation of the revenue-raising potential of taxes, evidence base advocacy framing from trusted sources, broad-based advocacy coalitions and the communication of clear policy objectives.


SSB taxes represent a promising strategy, alongside a broader comprehensive approach, for improving population diets and cardiovascular health, but face stiff industry opposition. Future research must focus on the influence of different SSB tax designs and context on population diet and health.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.

    Forouzanfar MH, Alexander L, Anderson HR, Bachman VF, Biryukov S, Brauer M, et al. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks in 188 countries, 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2015;386(10010):2287–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    McKinsey Global Institute. Overcoming obesity: An initial economic analysis. 2018.

  3. 3.

    Te Morenga L, Mallard S, Mann J. Dietary sugars and body weight: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and cohort studies. BMJ. 2012;346:e7492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Malik VS, Popkin BM, Bray GA, Despres JP, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sugar-sweetened beverages and risk of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(11):2477–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian Health Survey: Consumption of Added Sugars 2011–12 Report No.4363.0.55.011. Canberra, Australia; 2016.

  6. 6.

    Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Australia’s health no. 15. Cat. no. AUS 199. Canberra; 2016.

  7. 7.

    Pan A, Hu FB. Effects of carbohydrates on satiety: differences between liquid and solid food. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2011;14(4):385–90.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Ventura AK, Mennella JA. Innate and learned preferences for sweet taste during childhood. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2011;14(4):379–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Fung TT, Malik V, Rexrode KM, Manson JE, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sweetened beverage consumption and risk of coronary heart disease in women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89(4):1037–42.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    de Koning L, Malik VS, Kellogg MD, Rimm EB, Willett WC, Hu FB. Sweetened beverage consumption, incident coronary heart disease, and biomarkers of risk in men. Circulation. 2012;125(14):1735–41 S1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Bray GA, Popkin BM. Calorie-sweetened beverages and fructose: what have we learned 10 years later. Pediatr Obes. 2013;8(4):242–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Welsh JA, Sharma A, Abramson JL, Vaccarino V, Gillespie C, Vos MB. Caloric sweetener consumption and dyslipidemia among US adults. JAMA. 2010;303(15):1490–7.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Chen L, Caballero B, Mitchell DC, Loria C, Lin PH, Champagne CM, et al. Reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is associated with reduced blood pressure: a prospective study among United States adults. Circulation. 2010;121(22):2398–406.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Singh GM, Micha R, Khatibzadeh S, Lim S, Ezzati M, Mozaffarian D, et al. Estimated global, regional, and national disease burdens related to sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in 2010. Circulation. 2015;132(8):639–66.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Malik VS, Popkin BM, Bray GA, Despres JP, Hu FB. Sugar-sweetened beverages, obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disease risk. Circulation. 2010;121(11):1356–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Varsamis P, Formosa MF, Larsen RN, Reddy-Luthmoodoo M, Jennings GL, Cohen ND, et al. Between-meal sucrose-sweetened beverage consumption impairs glycaemia and lipid metabolism during prolonged sitting: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Nutr. 2018.

  17. 17.

    Johnson RK, Appel LJ, Brands M, Howard BV, Lefevre M, Lustig RH, et al. Dietary sugars intake and cardiovascular health: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2009;120(11):1011–20.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Australian Heart Foundation. Healthy drinks [Available from:

  19. 19.

    Foundation BH. [Available from:

  20. 20.

    Mytton OT, Clarke D, Rayner M. Taxing unhealthy food and drinks to improve health. BMJ. 2012;344:e2931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    • Backholer K, Blake M, Vandevijvere S. Have we reached a tipping point for sugar-sweetened beverage taxes? Public Health Nutr. 2016;19(17):3057–61 Summary of action and evidence relating to SSB taxes throughout 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Responsibility OfB. Economic and fiscal outlook. United Kingdom; 2017.

  23. 23.

    •• Colchero MA, Popkin BM, Rivera JA, Ng SW. Beverage purchases from stores in Mexico under the excise tax on sugar sweetened beverages: observational study. BMJ. 2016;352:h6704 First real-world evaluations of SSB taxes, demonstrating significant post implementation declines in SSB sales in Mexico, the city of Berkeley (CA, USA), and Chile respectively.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    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 Aff (Millwood). 2017;36(3):564–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    •• Falbe J, Thompson HR, Becker CM, Rojas N, McCulloch CE, Madsen KA. Impact of the Berkeley excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:e1–7 First real-world evaluations of SSB taxes, demonstrating significant post implementation declines in SSB sales in Mexico, the city of Berkeley (CA, USA), and Chile respectively.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    •• 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 Med. 2018;15(7):e1002596 First real-world evaluations of SSB taxes, demonstrating significant post implementation declines in SSB sales in Mexico, the city of Berkeley (CA, USA), and Chile respectively.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Zhong Y, Auchincloss AH, Lee BK, Kanter GP. The short-term impacts of the Philadelphia beverage tax on beverage consumption. Am J Prev Med. 2018;55(1):26–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Blake MR, Lancsar E, Peeters A, Backholer K. The effect of sugar-sweetened beverage price increases and educational messages on beverage purchasing behavior among adults. Appetite. 2018;126:156–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Waterlander WE, Ni Mhurchu C, Steenhuis IH. Effects of a price increase on purchases of sugar sweetened beverages. Results from a randomized controlled trial. Appetite. 2014;78:32–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Backholer K, Sarink D, Beauchamp A, Keating C, Loh V, Ball K, et al. The impact of a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages according to socio-economic position: a systematic review of the evidence. Public Health Nutr. 2016;19(17):3070–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Lal A, Mantilla-Herrera AM, Veerman L, Backholer K, Sacks G, Moodie M, et al. Modelled health benefits of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax across different socioeconomic groups in Australia: a cost-effectiveness and equity analysis. PLoS Med. 2017;14(6):e1002326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Centre for science in the public interest. Big Soda vs. Public Health (2016 Edition). 2016.

  33. 33.

    Bes-Rastrollo M, Schulze MB, Ruiz-Canela M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA. Financial conflicts of interest and reporting bias regarding the association between sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2013;10(12):e1001578; dicsussion e.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Council AB. Australian Beverages 2016 Annual report. Waterloo, New South Wales; 2017.

  35. 35.

    California legislative information. Assembly Bill No. 1838, Chapter 61. California; June 28, 2018.

  36. 36.

    Hagenaars LL, Jeurissen PPT, Klazinga NS. The taxation of unhealthy energy-dense foods (EDFs) and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs): an overview of patterns observed in the policy content and policy context of 13 case studies. Health Policy. 2017;121(8):887–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Magnusson RS, Patterson D. The role of law and governance reform in the global response to non-communicable diseases. Glob Health. 2014;10(1):44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Donaldson E. Advocating for sugar-sweetened beverage taxation: a case study of Mexico: John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health; 2017.

  39. 39.

    Wright A, Smith KE, Hellowell M. Policy lessons from health taxes: a systematic review of empirical studies. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Jou J, Niederdeppe J, Barry CL, Gollust SE. Strategic messaging to promote taxation of sugar-sweetened beverages: lessons from recent political campaigns. J Inf Secur. 2014;104(5):847–53.

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Thow AM, Quested C, Juventin L, Kun R, Khan AN, Swinburn B. Taxing soft drinks in the Pacific: implementation lessons for improving health. Health Promot Int. 2011;26(1):55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. Using pricing policies to promote healthy diets. Copenhagen 2015.

  43. 43.

    Bonilla-Chacín ME, Iglesias R, Suaya A, Trezza C, Macías C. Learning from the Mexican experience with taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages and energy-dense foods of low nutritional value. Washington D.C.: World Bank; 2016.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Baker P, Jones A, Thow AM. Accelerating the Worldwide Adoption of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes: Strengthening Commitment and Capacity; Comment on “The Untapped Power of Soda Taxes: Incentivizing Consumers, Generating Revenue, and Altering Corporate Behavior”. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 2017.

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathryn Backholer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Kathryn Backholer and Phillip Baker declare that they have no conflict of interest. This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cardiovascular Risk Health Policy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Backholer, K., Baker, P. Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes: the Potential for Cardiovascular Health. Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep 12, 28 (2018).

Download citation


  • Sugar-sweetened beverage
  • Fiscal policy
  • Tax
  • Obesity
  • Food policy
  • Global