Does Switzerland need a sugar tax?
Text: Armando MeierMore than 60 countries tax sugary drinks or foods, and studies show that these taxes can reduce consumption. While Switzerland has so far relied on voluntary measures, health economist Armando Meier explains the case for a sugar tax and the questions surrounding its design.
Key takeaways
- A sugar tax could make prices better reflect the health costs shared by society.
- Higher prices can help people cut back on sugar when they struggle with self-control.
- The burden on different income groups depends partly on consumption patterns, which vary between countries.
Of every franc of health spending in Switzerland, 60 centimes are financed collectively. Accordingly, people who consume too much sugar and become ill as a result do not bear the cost alone. That is the economic justification for a sugar tax — namely, that people who then continue to consume high levels of sugar will pay a greater share of the cost to society.
Another argument for a sugar tax relates to self-control. In a survey, 90% of Swiss voters recognized sugar as contributing to weight gain. Nevertheless, many people eat and drink more sugar than they would actually like to, with around 25% of people in Switzerland reporting that they struggle with self-control when it comes to healthy eating. Studies show that soft drink consumption falls by 10% to 33% following the introduction of sugar taxes. Higher prices for products with a high sugar content therefore encourage people to limit their own sugar consumption. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, 20% of consumption comes from added sugar in soft drinks, making such drinks one of the biggest sources of sugar in Switzerland.
More expensive products could, however, place a greater burden on households with lower incomes. In the United States, where soft drinks are consumed more frequently in lower-income families, this is repeatedly put forward as a counterargument to a sugar tax. The situation is different in Switzerland, where consumption in terms of liters of soft drinks is higher in households with a higher income. Accordingly, a tax probably wouldn’t be quite as disadvantageous for lower-income households here.
Regulation meets with approval
So far, Swiss politics has relied on voluntary agreements within the food industry. With the Milan Declaration, companies committed to reducing the sugar content of yogurt, cereals and soft drinks. There are also proposals for restrictions on the advertising of high-sugar products aimed at children, particularly as they have less self-control than adults. So far, these measures have had mixed results. The objective of reducing advertising to children has not been met. In terms of added sugar, on the other hand, there are signs of substantial reductions. Details of the products affected and their market shares, however, are not publicly available. Experiences from the USA show that the industry engages in very systematic lobbying against sugar taxes and is prepared to spend considerable sums on it.
For the Swiss general public, the idea of regulating sugar consumption is more popular than one might imagine. In a survey by the polling institute gfs.bern, around a third of people would support a tax on unhealthy foods, and over two-thirds believed that sugar should be subject to government restrictions. At the same time, 70% did not believe that taxes lead to changes in eating habits. They might be more optimistic in this regard if the clearly documented effects of a sugar tax on consumption were better known.
The sweeter, the more expensive
The introduction of a sugar tax would be a complex endeavor and require answers to several questions. Which foods should be taxed, for example? Would products with a naturally high sugar content, such as fruit juices or honey, be taxed at the same rate as products with added sugar, such as soft drinks? Experiences from over 60 countries do, however, provide an initial idea of the answers to these questions. So far, taxes on soft drinks have been implemented most frequently and studied most thoroughly.
Calculating the rate at which sugar should be taxed is by no means a trivial matter. From an economic perspective, the level of tax should be based on the sugar content: the more sugar a product contains, the higher the levy; in other words, the sweeter, the more expensive. In addition, some countries work with thresholds. In the United Kingdom, for example, the tax only applies down to a threshold of 5 g of sugar per 100 ml. At this time, the appropriate level of tax here in Switzerland is hard to reliably determine. The necessary calculation as a basis for political decision-making is a laborious task that has yet to be carried out for the whole country. An initial rough estimate by the ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences puts the level at 0.31 francs per liter of soft drink.
Whatever the design of a sugar tax, it wouldn’t stop anyone from enjoying a piece of cake, a chocolate bar or a cola. It would, however, create a stronger link between the price we pay for these things and the health and societal consequences of their consumption. A sugar tax may be a radical option, but it is also a scientifically sound one when it comes to preventing diseases — and not many such options exist. If you bear in mind that healthy eating is a key part of Switzerland’s health policy objectives, it’s about time we had a serious debate about a sugar tax.
Armando Meier is Professor of Health Economics. In his research, he links this field with behavioral and education economics, as well as with public policy.
More articles in this issue of UNI NOVA (November 2026).