Is Korea next in line for a sugar levy?
Bags of sugar are displayed at a large supermarket in Seoul, Wednesday. Yonhap
Could sugar tax help low-income households — or backfire?
President Lee Jae Myung has sparked debate by raising the possibility of an additional levy on sugar.
The aim is straightforward: to protect public health, particularly among lower-income households and other vulnerable groups where excessive sugar consumption is seen as having a disproportionate impact.
Critics, however, argue that those same groups could be hit hardest by higher prices if it drives up the cost of processed foods, further straining household budgets.
Disagreements also persist over which products should be covered and how high the levy should be set.
The idea gained traction on Wednesday after President Lee Jae Myung raised it in a social media post.
“What do you think about curbing sugar through a levy, similar to those imposed on tobacco, and reinvesting the revenue in regional and public healthcare?” he wrote.
Asked about the proposal the following day, a senior official at the Ministry of Economy and Finance said further discussion and consultation would be needed, noting that such a measure could have a significant impact on the food industry.
A sugar levy refers to a charge imposed on processed foods or beverages containing added sugars or sweeteners. The aim is to reduce sugar consumption and help prevent obesity, diabetes and other chronic diseases.
In 2016, the World Health Organization recommended adopting such measures, referring specifically to “taxes applied to sugar-sweetened beverages.” Since then, more than 120 countries and jurisdictions including the United States, France and the United Kingdom are reported to have implemented some form of sugar-related tax or levy.
Experts say that if introduced domestically, the measure would likely take the form of a levy rather than a formal tax, similar to the public health surcharge embedded in tobacco prices.
At present, such charges are applied to both conventional cigarettes and e-cigarettes under the National Health Promotion Act, with the revenue used to fund anti-smoking and related public health programs.
The idea of sugar tax itself is not new in Korea. In 2021, Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) lawmaker Kang Byung-won proposed an amendment to the National Health Promotion Act that would have imposed a “sugar-sweetened beverage levy” on manufacturers, processors and importers. The bill lapsed at the end of the parliamentary term without substantive debate.
The issue is now back on the agenda. DPK lawmaker Jung Tae-ho and the Health and Culture Research Center at Seoul National University plan to hold a forum on the proposal.
The forum on levies targeting excessive sugar consumption is scheduled to take place at the National Assembly Library on Feb. 12.
Eight in 10 back sugar tax
The central argument for a sugar levy is the protection of public health, with advocates emphasizing its potential impact on low-income groups.
Yang Sun-hee, a researcher at the Health and Culture Research Center at Seoul National University, noted that lower-income populations are more vulnerable to excessive sugar consumption, as they often have less access to health education and information.
“Pricing policy is needed to encourage companies to reformulate products and reduce sugar use across the industry,” Yang said.
Supporters argue that the measure could also help reduce broader social costs. According to the National Health Insurance Service, the social and economic losses attributable to obesity were estimated at 15.6 trillion won ($10.8 billion) in 2021.
That figure exceeds the combined losses linked to smoking and alcohol consumption. Supporters say these costs could be eased through the introduction of a sugar tax that encourages healthier dietary habits.
Others, however, voice caution, warning that a sugar levy could fuel inflation by functioning as an indirect tax.
“Unlike tobacco or alcohol, sugar is a necessity consumed by everyone,” said Hong Ki-young, a professor of business administration at Incheon National University. “A levy would erode households’ disposable income.”
The food industry has raised similar concerns. A phenomenon dubbed “sugarflation,” as one industry official put it, could emerge as a side effect of the levy.
“Sugar is a core ingredient not only in beverages, but also in bread, snacks and sauces — virtually all processed foods,” the official said. “A tax on sugar could trigger price increases across the entire food sector.”
Determining the scope and rate of the levy remains another contentious issue. Depending on the tax rate and the range of products covered, the ripple effects could vary significantly.
In a survey conducted by the Health and Culture Research Center at Seoul National University from Jan. 12 to 19, 80.1 percent of the 1,030 respondents said they supported the introduction of a levy targeting excessive sugar consumption.
Beverages were identified as the most urgent category for regulation, cited by 75.1 percent of respondents, followed by ice cream at 73.3 percent, and snacks, bread and rice cakes at 72.5 percent.
This article from the Hankook Ilbo, the sister publication of The Korea Times, is translated by a generative AI system and edited by The Korea Times.