Flynn: Sugary drink tax no sweet deal for Bostonians

The Boston City Council will soon consider whether to adopt a special tax on beverages including soda and sugary drinks. This ill-timed and unnecessary idea, if supported by both the City Council and the Massachusetts Legislature, will add one more cost increase for Boston families and yet another challenge for our small business community. I strongly oppose this tax and hope the Council will focus instead on issues that improve the lives of our residents.

The idea that has been presented for a hearing calls for imposing a tax of 2 cents per ounce on sugar-sweetened beverages – not 2 cents per beverage, but 2 cents per ounce. To put that number in perspective, under this tax the cost of a 2-liter beverage would increase by $1.35, and the cost of an 18-pack of 12-oz cans of soda or bottles of sports drinks would jump $4.32 – regardless of any sales, coupons or deposits. The price of some beverage brands would increase 60% or more.

In neighborhoods throughout Boston, residents and our seniors are already feeling the impact of rising grocery prices, including on everyday beverages. According to the most recent Consumer Price Index (CPI) report for the Boston area, prices for meats, poultry, fish and eggs are up 3.3% year over year. Prices for nonalcoholic beverages and beverage materials grew even faster, with costs rising 3.5%, before any new taxes. Those are real costs for Boston families – costs we in the Council should be looking for ways to mitigate, not increase. This tax would put the burden on working families already trying to make ends meet.

Those price increases also impact small businesses. A recent survey from the MassInc Polling Group (MPG) found that “rising costs of operation from inflation” was far and away the number one concern for small businesses in Massachusetts, a concern I hear from storeowners and restaurant owners across my district. Imposing this new tax will exacerbate these concerns by pushing customers to adjacent towns and reducing business revenue and jobs within the City of Boston.

After Philadelphia imposed a similar tax in 2017, researchers found that total volume sales of sugar or artificially sweetened drinks fell by 51% in that city, while rising more than 24% in zip codes adjacent to Philadelphia. The tax also led to more than 1,000 lost jobs in the city’s retail, transportation, and other industries. Pushing retail sales to other cities and towns does nothing to improve the lives of Boston residents, but it does hurt our business owners and their employees.

We need to instead focus on quality of life issues and delivering basic city services. Any tax increase proposal passed by the Council and signed by the mayor requires approval of the state Legislature, a road we have attempted to travel several times over the past few years to no avail.

What’s more, we are somehow once again considering raising revenues by taxing our constituents rather than looking at other potential local options that could spread the impact to tourists and visitors. Nor are we discussing any sort of budget changes that would allow the city to operate without asking our residents and businesses for more money.

Our neighbors are inundated with rising prices, and our small businesses are struggling with added costs. Is our solution really to sit in the Council Chamber and discuss adding to their financial woes? Instead of pursuing solutions that cannot even be implemented at the local level, let’s spend more time understanding and assisting with the economic issues that our constituents are facing daily.

The proposed beverage tax is bad policy and bad timing. I hope my colleagues will join me in swiftly dismissing the idea and focus instead on policy changes that will offer relief and opportunity to all of Boston.

Ed Flynn is a Boston City Councilor representing District 2