NP Rank:
Alabama To Impose Fat Tax
by IsraeliLawStudent | August 26, 2008 at 08:23 am
438 views | 4 Recommendations | 5 comments
Starting next year, severly overweight Alabama state employees will have to pay $25 more in health insurance in order to cover the increased risk of health problems faced by the obese. Taxing individuals for their own health risks is not entirely novel, an example of which is taxing cigarette buyers for the burden they ultimately place on the healthcare system. Critics say that taxation based on body mass is invasive, and cannot be compared to the taxation of leisure goods such as cigarettes. Many obese individuals cannot control their weight, and obesity may be considered a standard medical condition.
Alabama officials are warning state employees to shape up or pay more for health insurance.
On Friday, the State Employees' Insurance Board announced a new plan beginning next year in which state employees will be required to receive medication screenings for several conditions, including body mass index. Those considered obese or who have high blood pressure, high cholesterol or high glucose will have to pay $25 a month more in health insurance beginning in January 2011, if they don't take steps to address their health problems.
The new rule will affect more than 37,000 people employed by the state. Alabama is the first state to issue a so-called fat tax. The state already charges smokers a $24 per month surcharge (which will increase to $25 next month).
Alabama has the second highest obesity rate in the country, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Just over 30% of the population is obese, ranking just behind Mississippi. Still, a fat tax?
Alabama state officials say they will offer programs, such as Weight Watchers and YMCA discounts, to help the employees get in shape and avoid the penalty. But health experts aren't so sure a punitive approach is the best way to lower healthcare costs. The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine has published a list of tactics employers can use to help fight obesity. The list is made up entirely of positive incentives; nothing suggesting fines or penalties.
Jeffrey Levi, executive director of Trust for America's Health and a health policy expert at George Washington University, told WebMD that the Alabama requirements could be interpreted as a genetic penalty for those who are predisposed to weight or cholesterol problems. "We need to recognize the complexity of these things," he says.
-- Shari Roan
Crowd Power
First Flagged at 9:48 AM, Aug 26, 2008 by Resonant Earth
These members have powered this story:-
IsraeliLawStudent
Tel Aviv, Israel -
pawsum
Atlanta, Georgia, United States -
ottocub
Canada









Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
at 09:48 on August 26th, 2008
IsraeliLawStudent, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 14:03 on August 26th, 2008
IsraeliLawStudent, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Something has to give. Americans are the fatest people in the history of the planet Earth. Although I doubt $25 is going to make any of these obese employees change their lifestyles.
at 10:04 on June 29th, 2009
Look,
If you buy a new Mercedes, you expect to pay more tax than on an old Dodge Neon, right? There is a reason for that, right? -- A valid reason. This is the same. If someone were to drive badly and crash a lot, they'd have higher rates, too, right? Same, same. Likewise for someone with 2 or 3 DWI's. Well, if people REFUSE to do well with their health, why FORCE others to pay for their folly? That would be like, if I smoked cigarettes for years knowing it were harmful then expected everyone else to pay my medical bills if I the got cancer from it. If they want to, fine, but don't force others to pay for the evil/foolish deeds of the selfish.
at 10:08 on June 29th, 2009
If you really want to see something worth fussing about, look at the Yahoo!Buzz blog below! It is so outrageous that the poor man seems to have gotten ruined for doing what is right!
http://buzz.yahoo.com/article/1:50cd1a9a183758039b0841aa738c3f0b:06ae5af5805500b879aff7c39784909a;_ylt=AuZj2txYGGd_07GOFItZ3rE7vJZ4
at 09:51 on August 4th, 2009
I don't think a fat tax is very practical - there are several things wrong with Pigouvian taxes in general. They are hard to calculate because it is impossible to determine the exact amount of externality caused, in this case by obesity, and they affect different people in different ways! Here is an article about why a fat tax wouldn't work: http://www.mindreign.com/en/mindshare/Global-Economics/Fat-Tax/sl35291137bp387cpp10pn1.html