South Africa’s sugar tax, introduced in 2018 as a public health measure, is again under scrutiny as Treasury eyes new revenue sources. The tax, known as the Health Promotion Levy (HPL), was sold as a way to curb obesity. Seven years later, there is no clear proof that it has improved public health.
A Tax That Misses Its Target
Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana has warned that new tax measures will be needed to raise R20 billion by 2026. Business leaders fear this could include a hike in the sugar tax.
Critics argue the policy has failed its health objectives. Despite claims that it would reduce sugar intake, no independent or comprehensive study has proven that South Africans are eating healthier or losing weight. The only follow-up research came from the same academics who lobbied for the tax, raising concerns about bias.
The government once promised a full dietary study to understand what South Africans eat. That study was never done.
Economic Damage Already Clear
What the data does show is job losses. A Nedlac study found that 16,000 jobs were lost in the sugar industry in the first year alone. In September, Coca-Cola Beverages South Africa warned that 600 more jobs were at risk.
The tax has hit small farmers in KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga, where sugarcane is a lifeline for many rural families. These growers face collapsing demand, rising costs, and competition from cheap sugar imports.
For many, the tax has turned a fragile livelihood into a crisis.
The Poor Pay Twice
The sugar tax is regressive, hitting low-income consumers hardest. Soft drinks are not luxury goods for many South Africans but small comforts in a tight budget. When prices rise, it squeezes already strained households.
At the same time, rural communities lose jobs as sugarcane farms struggle. This double impact means the poor are taxed both at the till and in their towns.
Health Claims Without Local Proof
Supporters of the tax often cite global research linking sugar to obesity. But South Africa’s situation is different. Most low-income households rely on mielie meal and bread as daily staples. Few can afford meat, vegetables, or dairy.
In such a context, targeting soft drinks while ignoring overall diet patterns makes little sense. It treats a symptom, not the cause.
A Policy Without Evidence
Despite winning international praise, including a United Nations award for tackling obesity, South Africa has released no data showing the tax has improved public health outcomes.
Critics say the policy has become more about optics than impact. It allows the government to claim progress on health while ignoring the economic fallout.
Growth, Not Taxation, Is the Answer
Experts argue that real health gains come from economic growth, not new taxes. Higher incomes allow families to buy better food and lead healthier lives.
Instead of raising the sugar tax, they suggest supporting local agriculture, protecting jobs, and addressing the root causes of poor nutrition.
The message is clear: taxing poverty will not build prosperity or health.
South Africa’s sugar tax has failed to deliver measurable health benefits while costing jobs and weakening rural economies. As the next budget approaches, the government faces a choice between symbolic policy and sensible reform.
