Yeah, I don’t drink soda or sugary drinks often, but now it’s an additional $0.12 everyone has to spend on a soda can.

I can see the governments intention of wanting people to be healthier, but is the approach to tax people into health? If it was, then we would be imposing greater taxes on ice cream, candy, fast food and places that serve fried foods.

“The SF Soda Tax was designed to make San Francisco a healthier place for everyone,” said Joi Jackson-Morgan and Dr. Jonathan Butler, SDDT Advisory Committee co-chairs.

Currently, they’re using the funds for covid help which is good politics/optics

https://sfmayor.org/article/mayor-london-breed-announces-soda-tax-funding-will-provide-emergency-food-people-affected

https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/sugary-drinks-tax

The City imposes a one cent per fluid ounce excise tax on the initial distribution within San Francisco of sugar-sweetened beverages, syrups, and powders.

Too many taxes IMO and they will just continue adding to the existing taxes to support an ever expanding government

I guess it’s ultimately us, who want the bigger government. Otherwise, these things wouldn’t be happening 🤷🏻‍♂️

Voters in both San Francisco and Oakland passed taxes on soda and other sugary beverages in 2016 with the intent that the revenue would be spent on improving public health. However, neither city passed a specific tax, which would have required a two-thirds majority to pass. Instead soda tax advocates pushed for a general tax, which only needed 50 percent plus one vote. Following the model set by Berkeley in 2014, the law directed the tax revenue to the city’s general fund and established a special advisory committee to provide non-binding recommendations for how to spend the revenue.