Key topics:
- Sugar tax’s limited health impact and economic harm raise concerns.
- Lack of data on calorie intake questions the tax’s effectiveness.
- Proposals focus on holistic public health strategies, not punitive measures.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
The seventh BizNews Conference, BNC#7, is to be held in Hermanus from March 11 to 13, 2025. The 2025 BizNews Conference is designed to provide an excellent opportunity for members of the BizNews community to interact directly with the keynote speakers, old (and new) friends from previous BNC events – and to interact with members of the BizNews team. Register for BNC#7 here.
If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.
By Mlondi Mveli Mdluli*
The sugar tax was meant to fight obesity, but more than six years later, it has done little more than devastate our economy and imperil the livelihoods of thousands. Introduced as the Health Promotion Levy in 2018, this policy promised to reduce the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and, by extension, curb the rising tide of obesity and non-communicable diseases. Yet, despite these lofty goals, no definitive evidence has emerged to confirm any measurable improvement in public health. Instead, the tax has become synonymous with economic hardship—particularly for those whose lives depend on the sugar industry. This stark contrast between intent and impact calls for an immediate, transparent evaluation of the policy.
At its core, the sugar tax was predicated on the assumption that reducing SSB consumption would lower overall calorie intake, thereby decreasing obesity rates. However, no comprehensive calorie-intake study has been undertaken to verify whether the levy is achieving these health benefits. Without such essential data, the foundational justification for the tax remains on shaky ground. Critics contend that a singular fiscal measure cannot possibly address the multifaceted nature of obesity, which is influenced by lifestyle, socioeconomic factors, and cultural habits. This raises serious doubts about whether the sugar tax is a genuine public health intervention or merely a revenue-generating tool for the state.
Early research from Stellenbosch University further exposes the limitations of this approach. The study indicates that merely imposing a tax on SSBs is insufficient to meaningfully impact obesity rates. Instead, it suggests that a broader, more holistic strategy is necessary—one that incorporates public health education, improved access to nutritious food, and initiatives to promote physical activity. By failing to address these underlying factors, the sugar tax inadvertently penalizes an entire sector without tackling the true root causes of unhealthy living. This evidence should prompt a complete rethinking of our approach, shifting the focus from isolated fiscal measures to comprehensive health interventions.
While the purported health benefits remain unproven, the economic fallout from the sugar tax is both immediate and severe. In its first year, the levy resulted in the loss of 16,621 jobs, with nearly 9,711 of those cuts affecting the early stages of the supply chain among commercial and small-scale sugarcane growers. The South African Sugar Association has documented a dramatic drop in domestic sugar sales—down by 250,000 tonnes—which has forced producers to export surplus sugar at a loss. Furthermore, a 2021 Baker McKenzie report warned that expanding the tax to include pure juice could lead to an additional 5,000 job losses. These figures underscore the tangible socio-economic consequences of the tax, particularly in a nation already struggling with high unemployment and economic inequality.
The repercussions extend far beyond the sugar industry itself. Rural communities, especially in KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga, are bearing the brunt of this policy. Many small-scale farmers rely on sugar production as their primary source of income, and the tax’s impact threatens to unravel the fabric of these local economies. The Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy (BFAP) has cautioned that if the sugar tax remains—or worse, is expanded—South Africa could see a further 10% decline in direct jobs within the sugar sector by 2032. Such a scenario would have dire consequences for regional stability and economic sustainability, making it imperative that we reassess our strategy before more livelihoods are compromised.
In light of these economic and social challenges, it is clear that our current approach to combating obesity demands a fundamental overhaul. The Democratic Alliance (DA) proposes that instead of relying solely on punitive measures like the sugar tax, policymakers should invest in evidence-based public health strategies. This means launching robust education campaigns to promote balanced nutrition, developing initiatives to increase access to affordable healthy foods, and creating community programs that encourage physical activity. These interventions would not only address the underlying causes of obesity but also safeguard our economy by avoiding the collateral damage associated with mass job losses and industry decline.
As a member of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Trade, Industry, and Competition—and as the DA’s Deputy Spokesperson on this portfolio—I am calling on the government to act decisively. I have formally requested that the Minister of Health publish a comprehensive calorie-intake study to determine whether the sugar tax is truly effective in reducing obesity rates. If the evidence does not substantiate its purported health benefits, then it is incumbent upon us to repeal a policy that has become an unjustifiable burden on our economy and the livelihoods of South Africans. Transparency and accountability are not optional when policies have far-reaching impacts on both public health and economic stability.
Ultimately, the debate over the sugar tax transcends a single policy issue; it is a test of our commitment to evidence-based decision-making. South Africans deserve interventions that are as effective in promoting public health as they are considerate of our economic realities. The current trajectory—marked by economic fallout and unproven health benefits—is unsustainable. It is time for our legislators to reevaluate the sugar tax, pivot towards comprehensive health strategies, and ensure that future policies are guided by robust data rather than unfounded assumptions. Only through such a balanced approach can we hope to achieve genuine improvements in public health without sacrificing our nation’s economic well-being.
Read also:
- MAILBOX – A small (KZN) dairy farmer shares Uber Truths in open letter to Steenhuisen
- 🔒 South Africa said to prefer bilateral US trade deal over AGOA
- US Ambassador front-runner: Play it right and Trump could be best thing ever for SA
*Mlondi Mveli Mdluli is a Member of Parliament, and the DA’s Deputy Spokesperson on Trade, Industry and Competition.
