What are sin taxes really about?

By ERNESTO F. HERRERA

I read about Senator Ralph Recto’s argument in justifying his version of the sin tax bill. He doesn’t want to tax the tobacco industry to extinction, Recto said, and besides, if the government raises the taxes on tobacco and alcohol too much people will really stop smoking and drinking, and then where will we get the promised revenues?

But smoking and drinking (excessive drinking or alcoholism) are harmful to one’s health, and isn’t the proposal to raise sin taxes really intended to dissuade people from smoking and drinking less, or for that matter quitting these habits altogether?

Aren’t sin taxes meant to curb smoking and drinking in the first place?

There is now no doubt because of incontrovertible proof that smoking kills. It is estimated that one Filipino dies from a tobacco-related death every 10 seconds, making it an alarming public health crisis. Seven out of the 10 primary causes of death in the country—stroke, cancer, heart attacks, chronic lower respiratory disease, pneumonia and disease that occur around childbirth—are tobacco-related diseases.

Our country has the highest number of smokers among ASEAN countries. Over a third of our 90-million population are smokers.

According to the Global Youth Tobacco Survey, we also have one of the highest percentages of young smokers among Asian countries. About 30 percent of adolescents in the country’s urban areas smoke. Of these, more than 70 percent started smoking between ages 13 and 15.

A more recent survey conducted by the University of the Philippines Communications Research Society (UP CommResSoc) in partnership with HealthJustice showed that, indeed, our young people have become heavy smokers.

The survey on youth smokers, which was done in September in public schools in Quezon City, revealed that 47 percent of high school smokers were between 15 to 16 years old, 26 percent were 11 to 14 years old, and 23 percent are 17 to 18 years old.

A World Health Organization study revealed that tobacco-related illnesses kill 20,000 Filipinos a year and leave the government poorer by about P46 billion in economic and medical costs.

Indeed, due to its staggering negative impact on Philippine society, one could consider cigarette and alcohol addictions as socially sinful activities in the same manner that drug addiction and corruption are.

Yes, if people smoked and drank less as a result of the measure, perhaps that would dampen increases in revenue, but the resulting health benefits for the country would mean much more.

I understand, for many Filipinos to grab a smoke and a drink is the preferred way to take a break from work and from the stressful routines of ordinary life.

I myself am not a smoker or a drinker. Yet I don’t mind keeping company with those who on certain occasions have fallen under the influence of alcohol and nicotine. Indeed, my best friend, the late Ka Blas Ople was both a smoker and a drinker (although he became a teetotaler later on, many years before his death) and it’s amusing how we were able to develop a fast friendship even as I shunned his favorite vices.

The watered down version of the Malacañang-backed Department of Finance proposal that came out of Recto’s Senate committee is similar to the Philip Morris Fortune Tobacco Corp’s compromise proposal, which the cigarette company has been pushing among legislators.

The buzz about members of Congress getting lobby money from cigarette manufacturers is always strong whenever sin tax measures are being debated in Congress. But I digress.

What matters most is the dual purpose of raising revenue and curbing both smoking and drinking. And for sure, cigarette and alcohol companies can afford to pay more.

Let’s face it, a more expensive pack of Marlboros is not going to convert that many of our people to the path of the healthy and righteous. And most beer drinkers would continue to chugalug even if SMBs are a few pesos more.

But the poorer members of our population who cannot afford the medical costs of smoking and drinking related diseases are the ones who would be discouraged more—or perhaps encouraged more to quit or at least lessen their smoking and drinking.

And what are sin taxes really about anyway?

Sin taxes, or sumptuary taxes as they are sometimes called, are supposed to discourage the use of products that are frowned upon by a lot if not most in society. They are financial disincentives meant to turn off people from engaging in activities that harm them and the rest of society.

Sin taxes are not just about raising revenue for a cash-depleted government. It is not just a matter of where the government can make the most money the quickest.

Yes, the government needs the money. But it also can’t afford to stand idle as its citizens die prematurely because of cigarette smoking. Raising taxes has never been this morally and economically defensible.

ernestboyherrera@yahoo.com