A02-03 Evidence from a rapid review to identify high fat, sugar, salt food tax options for the Health Economic Analysis incorporating effects on Labour outcomes, Households, Environment and Inequalities (HEALTHEI) Project

Excess consumption of calories in the UK leads to obesity, which is a cause of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Unhealthy diets, in which people eat excess food High in Fat, Sugar and Salt (HFSS), are causing ill health and are an influential factor in creating health inequalities. The HEALTHEI project explores which HFSS food taxes would have the greatest benefits to health, labour and work outcomes, household expenditure, environmental sustainability and inequalities within the UK food system. We present the first component of Work Package 1: a rapid review of published evidence. A systematic rapid review approach examined published evidence around HFSS taxation options for food and non-alcoholic beverages. A pre-planned framework ensured a systematic approach. A search strategy was designed a priori and adapted for use on PubMed, HMIC, Scopus, Google, Mintel/Mintel Food and Drink, and Business Source Premier Ultimate. Databases were searched for papers published between January 2010 and December 2022. Papers were included if based in high-income countries and published in English. Screening of titles and abstracts, then full text of papers was performed by the WP1 team. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were also hand-searched. A standardised data extraction template was developed and evidence from the included papers was extracted by the WP1 team under themes for effectiveness, costs/unintended consequences, and barriers to implementation. Data quality of papers was also assessed. Six categories of tax options were identified by the rapid review; high fat, high sugar, high salt, “junk-food”, sugar-sweetened-beverages, and meats plus sugar-sweetened-beverages, all of which had a broadly positive impact on consumption and health. An infographic was developed to concisely communicate the review findings. Five core rationales for food taxes also emerged (Change Consumption, Reduce/Prevent Harm, Change Product Affordability, Raise Revenue, and Industry Impact). The review demonstrated that there is a need to develop an impactful food tax option that incorporates a multitude of rationales, however, no obvious contender emerged from the review. The results of the review will be synthesised with evidence from stakeholder workshops and media analysis to understand the feasibility, impact and logistics of implementing a future food tax.