The Spectator has nailed the lie behind sin taxes namely that, despite what Nanny likes to claim, sin taxes are deliberately aimed at poor people.
For why?
Nanny believes that the taxes will force people who have low incomes to change their bad habits (smoking, drinking, eating sugary food, eating fats food etc), because people on low incomes (so the theory goes) simply will not be able to afford these "vices" if they are taxed sufficiently and will thus be forced to change their "bad habits".
The only problem with this theory is that it is bollocks!
People maintain their "bad habits" by;
- Switching to cheaper brands
- Avoiding taxes (eg by booze cruises)
- Evading taxes (eg by black market fakes, smuggling etc)
- Cutting back on other "good" items, eg healthy food etc
Hence sin taxes do no good at all, other than provide Nanny with an additional revenue stream.
As the Spectator says:
"To all intents and purposes, they are fines imposed on ordinary people as punishment for engaging in activities that displease super-rich do-gooders such as Michael Bloomberg and Jamie Oliver."