Quantcast
Food
Shuttersock

3 Reasons a Meat Tax Is a Good Idea

By Ben Williamson

A new analysis from the investor network Farm Animal Investment Risk and Return (FAIRR) Initiative argues that meat is going down the same road as tobacco, carbon emissions and sugar toward a "sin tax"—a levy intended to reduce consumption of products that are harmful. Such an excise tax on meat would help cover the health and environmental costs that result from using animals for food.


Cigarettes, alcohol and gasoline are already federally taxed to help pay for their hidden health or environmental costs. In 2014, Berkeley, California, passed a soda tax, and it has been working. Researchers of the tax found that just one year after the tax started, sales of sugar-sweetened drinks fell by nearly 10 percent, while sales of water increased by about 16 percent.

But while meat consumption is a known health hazard and meat production is a leading source of environmental degradation, the meat industry has gotten off easy.

Why Congress Should Support a Sin Tax on Meat

A 10-cent tax on every pound of chicken, turkey, pig, cow, fish and other animal flesh sold in grocery stores and restaurants could help reduce Americans' skyrocketing annual healthcare costs by encouraging people to eat less meat.

According to the American Dietetic Association, vegetarians are less prone to heart disease, diabetes and cancer than meat-eaters are and also less likely to be obese.

The production of meat is also a leading cause of climate change, a looming environmental disaster that threatens the U.S. with billions of dollars in damages from rising sea levels, worsening storms and increased droughts.

By discouraging meat consumption, this tax could help prevent future climate change and related natural disasters. Revenue from the tax could be used to fund educational programs about the many benefits of reducing meat consumption.

Here are three reasons why a meat tax is a good idea.

1. A meat tax is good for public health.

The U.S. spends more on health care than any other nation and is one of the largest consumers of meat. Animal products are the only dietary sources of cholesterol and are by far the largest sources of saturated fat in American diets.

Numerous studies have linked the consumption of animal flesh to cancer. A major Harvard study found that people who frequently eat chicken cooked without the skin (supposedly the healthier way to prepare chicken) were 52 percent more likely to develop bladder cancer than people who don't eat chicken.

An analysis recently published in JAMA Internal Medicine found that, based on 32 observational studies, meat-eaters have significantly higher blood pressure than people who avoid meat.

It doesn't make sense that the millions of meat-free Americans have to help pick up the tab (through taxes and health insurance premiums) when meat-eaters get sick. A tax on meat would make the tax system more equitable—similar "sin" taxes already exist for alcohol and cigarettes.

2. A meat tax is good for the environment.

Scientists and world leaders increasingly agree that climate change is the biggest challenge humanity faces, and the meat industry is one of the world's leading causes of it. As the Guardian reports, "Food production causes a quarter of all the greenhouse gas emissions that are driving global warming, largely from the raising of cattle and other livestock."

According to an Oxford University study, surcharges of 40 percent on beef and 20 percent on milk would account for the damage their production causes people via climate change.

"It is clear that if we don't do something about the emissions from our food system, we have no chance of limiting climate change below 2 C, said lead author Marco Springmann of the Oxford Martin Program on the Future of Food. "But if you'd have to pay 40 percent more for your steak, you might choose to have it once a week instead of twice."

The researchers concluded that increasing the price of beef by 40 percent would lead to a 13 percent drop in consumption.

Consider the following:

  • A study by the University of Chicago found that going vegan is 50 percent more effective in fighting climate change than switching from a standard car to a hybrid.
  • Animal agriculture is a leading source of carbon-dioxide, nitrous-oxide and methane emissions, the top three greenhouse gases.
  • The United Nations has determined that raising animals for food causes enormous local and global environmental problems and that it should be a main focus in every discussion of land degradation, climate change, water and air pollution, water shortages and the loss of biodiversity. The U.N. stressed that a global shift toward a vegan diet is necessary to combat the worst effects of climate change.

Unless people dramatically reduce their consumption of animal products, we won't be able to make a meaningful dent in the climate crisis. A tax on meat could quickly and dramatically decrease meat consumption and help save the planet.

3. A meat tax is good for animals.

On today's massive factory farms, animals are abused in horrible ways. Cows, pigs, chickens and turkeys are routinely mutilated without any painkillers and confined to filthy cages, sheds or feedlots for their entire lives.

Fish are crowded into massive, filthy tanks in which parasites run rampant.

In the poorly regulated slaughterhouses of the U.S., billions of animals routinely have their throats cut while they're still conscious, and millions are scalded to death in tanks of hot water every year.

Animals are paying a terrible price to supply society with meat.

What will this proposal cost the average American?

A typical meat-eating family of four might pay only about $5 per month, and a chunk of that would likely be absorbed by the largest meat-producing companies. If the family members replaced some meat with healthy vegan foods, they would likely save hundreds or thousands of dollars in medical expenses over time as their health improved.

Of course, a vegetarian or vegan family would not have to pay the tax at all.

Will farmers and ranchers lose their jobs?

Corporate animal factories have largely replaced family farms, and machines have replaced many employees at these facilities. The jobs that remain are extremely dangerous, and the workers who fill them (usually immigrants) are often exploited and treated poorly.

Human Rights Watch conducted a major study of working conditions in the industry and concluded:

"Meatpacking is the most dangerous factory job in America ... Nearly every worker interviewed for this report bore physical signs of a serious injury suffered from working in a meat or poultry plant ... Every country has its horrors, and this industry is one of the horrors in the United States."

As Americans increasingly switch to plant-based diets, more jobs, with safer working conditions, will be created to produce vegan foods. Several prominent business leaders and entrepreneurs, like Bill Gates, Sir Richard Branson and Sergey Brin, have invested in plant-based food companies and clean meat food technology.

Is this proposal politically feasible?

Yes. Although the tobacco and alcohol lobbies have enormous political influence, taxes on cigarettes and alcohol have increased. Now, it is time to protect consumers and the environment from the negative impact of meat production and consumption.

The Oxford researchers said that these taxes on meat and dairy would reduce consumption, which would reduce greenhouse emissions, health issues and animal suffering arising from consumption of these foods.

A tax on meat is a good idea whose time has come.

Reposted with permission from our media associate AlterNet.

Show Comments ()
Sponsored
Politics
Children fishing in Tamil Nadu, the Indian region where protests took place partly over concerns of a copper smelter's impact on fish. Abhishek.cty / CC BY-SA 4.0

Police Open Fire on Pollution Protesters in India, Killing at Least 9

A protest of a controversial copper smelter in the Tamil Nadu state on the southeastern tip of India took a violent turn Tuesday when police opened fire on demonstrators, killing at least nine, Reuters reported.

Keep reading... Show less
Popular
Eagle Creek fire. Curtis Perry / Flickr / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Teen Ordered to Pay $36.6 Million For Starting Oregon Wildfire

A teenager who admitted to starting the Eagle Creek Canyon wildfire in Oregon that singed approximately 48,000 acres of forest land in September was ordered to pay $36.6 million in restitution.

Hood River County Circuit Judge John A. Olson admitted that the youngster will probably never be able to pay the total amount, but was obligated under state law to issue the full award to the victims of the massive blaze, including residents whose properties burned down and the state and federal departments that fought the fire, The Oregonian reported.

Keep reading... Show less
Climate
Open Grid Scheduler / Grid Engine / Flickr / CC0 1.0

Shell Shareholders Vote Down Climate Change Proposal But Signal They Still Want Action

A vast majority of Royal Dutch Shell shareholders voted down a proposal calling on the company to set specific targets for lowering its carbon dioxide emissions on Tuesday, putting their faith in the company's internal plans to fight climate change.

Keep reading... Show less
Energy
NPCA Online / Flickr / CC BY 2.0

Atlantic Coast Pipeline to Sideline 100 Miles of Construction in Virginia and West Virginia

Builders of the controversial Atlantic Coast Pipeline told federal authorities they will delay construction along 21 miles in West Virginia and 79 miles in Virginia until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) issues a revised "incidental take statement," which limits the number of threatened or endangered species that might be accidentally killed or harmed during development activities.

Lead developer Dominion Energy filed documents Tuesday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in response to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling last week. The court sided with environmental groups and their lawyers that the FWS' initial review was not clear enough in the case of the $6.5 billion pipeline and vacated one of its key permits.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Health
Solar, coal and natural gas are prominent at the Big Bend Power Station and Manatee Viewing Center parking lot in Apollo Beach, FL. Walter / CC BY 2.0

Premature Births Linked to Living Near Power Plants

Closing coal- and oil-fired power plants may help decrease the incidence of premature births in surrounding areas, according to new research.

Keep reading... Show less
Energy
Lake Oahe, the source of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe's drinking water. DVS / Flickr / CC BY 2.0

Stopping a Dakota Access Pipeline Leak in Under 10 Minutes? A Fairy Tale, Say the Standing Rock Sioux

By Susan Cosier

Nine minutes. That's the longest it would take to detect a leak and shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) should the crude oil within begin escaping into the North Dakota prairie or the Missouri River. At least that's what Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), the pipeline's owner, says. It's a claim that the Standing Rock Sioux tribe calls completely unrealistic given the company's "inadequate" emergency response plan.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Energy
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley announced construction of Enbridge's Line 3 pipeline replacement project in Hardisty, Alberta, Canada, Aug. 10, 2016. Marc Chalifoux / Epic Photography for the Government of Alberta, CC BY-ND 2.0

How Enbridge Helped Write Minnesota Pipeline Laws, Aiding Its Line 3 Battle Today

By Logan Carroll

The Minnesota section of Enbridge's Line 3 pipeline accounts for nearly 300 miles of the longest crude oil transport system in the world, and it is failing. The multi-billion-dollar transnational corporation has applied for a permit to replace it. Opposition from tribes in the region and environmental groups is slowing the project, but the process at times appears so tilted in Enbridge's favor that, watching the court battles and utility commission meetings, it almost feels like Enbridge wrote the rules.

Keep reading... Show less
Animals
Human activity, including domesticating livestock, has had a major impact on earth's biomass. Malcolm Morley~commonswiki

Humans and Big Ag Livestock Now Account for 96 Percent of Mammal Biomass

A first-of-its-kind study published Monday shows that, when it comes to impacting life on Earth, humans are punching well above our weight.

The study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is the first ever comprehensive census of the distribution of the biomass, or weight of living creatures, across classification type and environment. It found that, while humans account for 0.01 percent of the planet's biomass, our activity has reduced the biomass of wild marine and terrestrial mammals by six times and the biomass of plant matter by half.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored

mail-copy

The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!