The Ethical Validity of Health-Promoting Taxes on Unhealthy Food and Beverages in the Commonwealth Caribbean

Abstract

Health-promoting taxes on unhealthy food and beverages raise a prima facie presumption of regressiveness as they impose a uniform tax burden regardless of income differences. This burden may disproportionately impact the poorest segments of society, potentially undermining equity and substantive equality. If this is true, the implementation of these taxes in the Commonwealth Caribbean could be considered largely unethical as majority of the region’s population is poor. Relying on utilitarianism and empirical evidence, I argue that these taxes are ethically justified as they maximize overall utility and promote equity in the long run. I argue that these taxes are not inherently regressive but rather raise an initial presumption of regressiveness. I demonstrate that they bring economic, public health, and societal benefits that counterbalance any perceived regressiveness. Moreover, I suggest that instead of simply labelling these taxes as regressive or not, we should consider a continuum of regressivity. I propose the concept of “fluid regressivity”, which allows us to assess the degree of regressiveness and its impact more accurately.

Keywords: Fiscal Measures, Health-promoting Taxes, Unhealthy Diets, Caribbean Food Policy, Caribbean Health Law