A brand new so-called “soda tax” that was accredited by voters within the metropolis of Santa Cruz went into impact on Thursday, the primary tax of its variety to be handed in California since a ban was signed by former Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018.
The tax — accredited by voters in November — provides a 2-cents-per-ounce tax on nonalcoholic drinks which have a number of caloric added sweeteners and which have 40 or extra energy per 12 fluid ounces of beverage, together with sodas, coffees, sweetened ice teas, vitality drinks and slushies.
4 different cities in California, together with San Francisco, Berkeley, Oakland and Albany, have already got a tax on sugar-sweetened drinks on the books, with Berkeley being the primary metropolis within the nation to take action.
However Santa Cruz is the primary one to institute a brand new one since legislators and enterprise leaders struck a deal that was signed by the earlier governor that prohibited native governments from imposing taxes on soda till 2031.
Santa Cruz Metropolis Councilmember Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson, who was one of many proponents of the soda tax, advised Lookout Santa Cruz after the measure handed in November that the marketing campaign was framed as a battle between Santa Cruz and the American Beverage Assn.
“That actually resonated with folks, that this was huge trade making an attempt to control and strong-arm native voters,” Kalantari-Johnson advised the publication. “We gained’t let huge trade resolve for us.”
Santa Cruz’s sugary drink tax doesn’t apply to drinks meant for medical use, drinks that proceed lower than 40 energy per 12 fluid ounces of drink, drinks for infants, supplemental or meal substitute drinks, milk merchandise, 100% pure vegetable or fruit juice, concentrates, sweetened medicine (reminiscent of cough syrup) and alcoholic drinks.
“Santa Cruz demonstrates that when introduced with the information concerning the risks of sugary drinks, voters see by way of the soda trade’s multi-million-dollar efforts to deceive them with misinformation,” Nancy Brown, chief government of the American Coronary heart Assn., mentioned in a current assertion. “The American Coronary heart Affiliation was proud to assist the poll measure and stays dedicated to the town of Santa Cruz on this years-long David vs. Goliath effort in opposition to the beverage trade.”
Steve Maviglio, a spokesperson for the American Beverage Assn. which lobbied closely in opposition to soda taxes, decried the most recent measure in an announcement.
“Santa Cruz is implementing a tax that violates a well-liked statewide ban on grocery taxes and that was opposed by a broad coalition of small companies, progressive leaders, labor unions, and social justice organizations as an unfair burden on working households already fighting record-high costs,” he wrote in an e-mail.
The American Beverage Assn. has additionally launched a marketing campaign known as “Your Cart Your Alternative.”
“The value will increase from a tax harm lower-income communities and individuals who work paycheck to paycheck essentially the most,” based on the marketing campaign’s web site. “Extra taxes are the very last thing working households want proper now amid crippling inflation, provide chain points and the value of fuel making on a regular basis objects dearer already.”
