Seattle soda tax raises nearly $1 million more than predicted in first 3 months

[CrazyDonkey]

They likely fudged their original revenue estimates ($14.8 mil) to more than account for an expected drop in consumption (ala what happened in Philadelphia), so they could show a nice upside surprise. That they're more than 2/3 there at the sixth-month mark, however, must mean that consumption didn't drop anywhere near as much as projected. For whatever reason, Seattleites, unlike Philadelphians, didn't generally consider driving out of town to buy untaxed soda to be worth the gas and time expended. Shoppers didn't vote with their feet (or gas pedals), as was grimly predicted by some, but with their debit cards. It has been a hot summer.

[CrazyDonkey]

"Seattle’s soda-tax collections top $16 million in 9 months, surpass first-year estimate":

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...year-estimate/

Seattle has collected nearly $17 million in the first nine months of its tax on sugar-sweetened beverages, already surpassing what the city initially expected the tax would raise in its first year. Before the so-called soda tax took effect on Jan. 1, officials estimated it would raise about $15 million in 2018.

It’s possible the tax is generating more revenue than anticipated because baseline assumptions behind the city’s estimate were flawed. It’s also possible the measure meant to discourage unhealthful choices is failing to make some people change their habits.

"Story of Seattle: The city’s new soda tax is usurious — and also too low":

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...-also-too-low/

When Seattle politicians passed a big tax on soda and other sugary drinks, there was worry at the time that the tax was too big.

Well, we’re a year into the experiment. And in another of those “only in Seattle” developments, it appears that the problem with our soda tax isn’t that it’s too high. It’s probably too low — maybe far too low.

The city predicted the tax would cut soda consumption by 40 percent. But through the first nine months, the tax is generating revenues at a rate 52 percent higher than predicted — suggesting it’s possible it may be having no effect on Seattleites’ soda appetites whatsoever.

I have a theory. Which is that New Seattle is so rich it can’t be bothered with worrying about puny soda taxes.

Could that be what’s happening with the soda tax, which is also voluntary? That Seattle is such a boomtown it’s now defying the laws of economics?

Some of this may turn out to be happening in slices of the city (researchers at the UW are studying it). But much of the debate at the time seems, in retrospect, nostalgically off. Like we were talking about a middle-class city we thought we still were. Rather than the gentrified one we are.

[Flightoficarus87]

/\ - The above 2 posts sum it up IMO.

Seattle is such a wealthy city these days - was a pesky little soda tax really going to derail the economic freight train it has become? or do much to curb consumption?

And...

With the traffic here - who really wants to go the hassle of driving out of town to save peanuts on a soda or two? (unless you're on the outskirts of city limits, anyways).

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by Flightoficarus87

/\ - The above 2 posts sum it up IMO.

Seattle is such a wealthy city these days - was a pesky little soda tax really going to derail the economic freight train it has become? or do much to curb consumption?

And...

With the traffic here - who really wants to go the hassle of driving out of town to save peanuts on a soda or two? (unless you're on the outskirts of city limits, anyways).

Might have been different if Costco wasn't inside the city limits.