Just Replace Sugar with Sweeteners? Questions Arise with Germany's "Sugar Tax"

Will Cola Prices Rise? What Germany's "Sugar Tax" Aims to Change

Buying your usual sweet drink at a convenience store or vending machine. What if the price hasn't changed, but the sugar content inside has slightly decreased?

The "sugar tax" being processed for implementation in Germany is a policy designed to encourage such changes in manufacturers.

According to an article provided by the German newspaper DIE ZEIT, the German government has approved a bill to begin taxing sugary drinks starting July 1, 2027. However, it still requires approval by the federal parliament, so it hasn't been enacted into law yet.

What concerns consumers, of course, is the potential price increase. However, the consumer protection group Foodwatch believes that the impact of the tax should not be judged solely by the price tags.

The focus is on whether manufacturers will raise prices or change the composition of the drinks. It lies in that choice.

Why Taxation Could Change the Contents of Drinks

The items targeted for this tax include cola, lemonade, sweetened iced tea, energy drinks, and fruit juices with added sugar.

In a system where the tax burden varies according to the amount of sugar, manufacturers have several response options.

They can maintain the traditional taste and reflect the tax burden in the price, or they can absorb it by cutting some of the profits. Another option is to reduce the amount of sugar, changing the composition to avoid or lessen the tax burden.

Louise Mölling from Foodwatch is hopeful for this change in composition. The article introduces the perspective that the sugar tax does not necessarily lead to price increases but can lead to product improvements.

However, this is not a guarantee that prices won't rise. For products with a strong emphasis on taste or where changing the composition is difficult, manufacturers might choose to pass the cost onto prices.

It's important to note that not all products will change in the same way due to the sugar tax.

In the UK, the Average Sugar Content of Targeted Drinks Decreased by 46%

The idea of manufacturers changing compositions to align with tax systems has precedents.

According to a 2024 review document by the UK government, the average sugar content in drinks subject to the soft drinks tax decreased by 46% between 2015 and 2020. The government evaluates that the system encouraged widespread composition changes.

This figure indicates that the sugar tax can be a means to change the contents of products sold, not just a price increase measure.

If the sugar content of products consumers regularly buy decreases, it could lead to reduced intake without them having to compare nutritional labels each time or resist drinks with strong willpower.

However, "a 46% reduction in average sugar content" is not the same as "a 46% reduction in national sugar intake." Nor does it mean that obesity and diseases have decreased by the same proportion.

Sales volume, consumption amount, and sugar intake from other foods also play a role. The results of product improvements and the ultimate impact on people's health need to be evaluated separately.

A Policy Not to Dismiss as "Personal Responsibility"

Another focus for Foodwatch is health disparities.

Mölling points out that children from low-income households are more susceptible to the effects of obesity, arguing that the sugar tax has a role in mitigating this inequality to some extent.

This raises the question of whether dietary habits should be explained solely by personal will.

When considering policies, attention must also be paid to the environment surrounding choices, such as prices, advertising, and the types of products available. Simply blaming those who choose sweet drinks won't change the marketplace or products.

On the other hand, if the tax burden is directly added to retail prices, those with less financial leeway may feel a stronger burden.

In other words, the goal of reducing health disparities and the issue of increased purchase burdens can coexist. You cannot judge the fairness of a policy by focusing on only one of these aspects.

The Beverage Industry's Concern About "Preparation Time"

While there are welcoming voices, the industry is concerned about the burden.

According to the original article, the German Brewers Association criticizes that the sugar tax will impose a significant burden on consumers and businesses. They argue that there is not enough preparation time given to the customs authorities and companies responsible for tax collection, in addition to the extra administrative work.

In response, Foodwatch argues that discussions have been ongoing since spring, and manufacturers should have had time to prepare for the introduction.

However, the necessity of the policy and whether it can be smoothly implemented are separate issues.

Reviewing compositions requires taste verification, and changes in product labeling and management tasks may arise. If the system becomes complex, it could be a heavy burden for businesses with limited personnel for response.

Not only the introduction timing but also clarity of rules and practical support are conditions for the system to function.

Social Media Reactions Show "Distrust in Tax Revenue," Reader Comments Express "Concerns About Sweeteners"

Online, there are voices questioning not only the health objective itself but also the system's structure and the use of the money.

A Reddit post dated October 14 criticizes the sugar tax policy, suggesting that unless the tax revenue is surely used for healthcare, it might just be a means to secure financial resources.

This reaction indicates that how a tax is perceived is influenced not just by the tax rate. It's about why it is collected, where it is used, and how the results are demonstrated. Without clarity, it is hard to gain support as a health policy.

On the other hand, reader comments on the provided DIE ZEIT article expressed concerns that sugar might just be replaced with artificial sweeteners. While understanding the reduction of sugar, they question calling it a "healthier product" outright.

These are opinions from the comment section of a news site, not social media posts.

Both are individual posts and do not represent the overall opinion of German society. Nonetheless, it can be inferred that "trust in tax revenue" and "what replaces sugar" are key points in the discussion.

"Reducing Sugar" and "Sweeteners Are Safe" Are Not the Same

When considering concerns about artificial sweeteners, it's important not to confuse different health-related questions.

One question is whether using non-sugar sweeteners instead of sugar aids in long-term weight management or disease prevention. Another is the safety question of how much of each sweetener can be consumed.

In 2023, WHO issued a conditional guideline advising against using non-sugar sweeteners for weight management or reducing the risk of non-communicable diseases. People with existing diabetes are excluded from this recommendation.

At the same time, WHO clarifies that this guideline is not based on toxicity evaluations of individual sweeteners and does not replace safety standards like acceptable intake levels.

Therefore, interpreting it as "WHO has declared all sweeteners dangerous" is incorrect. Conversely, thinking that "replacing sugar with sweeteners guarantees long-term health benefits" is also not appropriate.

In evaluating the sugar tax, it is necessary to check not only the amount of sugar reduction but also how substitute ingredients and consumption volumes change.

If Considering in Japan, First Replace "the Usual One Bottle"

This discussion is not a distant topic for Japanese readers either.

For example, drinking a 500ml beverage containing 10 grams of sugar per 100ml results in 50 grams of sugar. If the composition changes to 5 grams per 100ml, drinking the same amount would result in 25 grams.

This is not indicative of a specific product but a calculation example to consider the meaning of composition changes.

Even if the drinking amount remains the same, the intake changes if the product itself changes. Conversely, if the drinking amount increases because sugar content has decreased, the reduction effect diminishes.

If Japan considers a similar system, it will need to design which drinks to target, how to set sugar standards, and how to make it easier to choose sugar-free drinks, rather than simply adopting overseas tax rates.

Linking tax revenue to improving children's food environments and health support is also an essential point for gaining acceptance.

Success Is Measured Not Just by Tax Revenue and Price Tags

The sugar tax has the goals of securing financial resources and encouraging manufacturers to reduce sugar content.

There is an interesting relationship here. If more products change their composition to avoid being taxed, tax revenue may not grow as much. Still, it might be closer to the policy goal of reducing sugar content.

Conversely, even if a lot of tax revenue is collected, if the contents of products and consumer behavior have not changed much, the success as a health policy must be evaluated separately.

It's not just about how much is collected. Has sugar content decreased? How have purchase prices changed? Who bears the burden? Have children's drinking habits and health indicators improved? These need to be evaluated cumulatively.

The question posed by Germany's sugar tax is not just whether to burden those who drink sweet beverages.

It's a theme worth considering in Japan: to what extent should healthy choices be left to individual effort, and how much can product design and marketplace systems support them?

Sources and References

1. DIE ZEIT/Reuters: German Sugar Tax Bill, Foodwatch's Evaluation, Industry Opposition
   https://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2026-10/zuckersteuer-getraenke-bundesregierung-foodwatch

2. UK Treasury & HM Revenue and Customs: Review Document on Soft Drinks Tax
   Government evaluation that the average sugar content of drinks within the scope decreased by 46% from 2015 to 2020, and an explanation of the system encouraging composition changes.GOV.UK
   https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/soft-drinks-industry-levy-review/hmt-hmrc-soft-drinks-industry-levy-review

3. WHO: Announcement on the Use of Non-Sugar Sweeteners for Weight Management
   Materials to confirm the content of conditional recommendations, scope, and limitations in interpreting research.who.int
   https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-use-non-sugar-sweeteners-for-weight-control-in-newly-released-guideline

4. WHO: Guidelines on Non-Sugar Sweeteners
   Explanation distinguishing weight management guidelines from toxicity evaluations and acceptable intake levels of individual components.who.int
   https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240073616

5. Reddit: Post Questioning the Use of Sugar Tax Revenue
   Dated October 14, 2026. A summary of the publicly available post found in search results. It is an individual's opinion and not backed by materials or public opinion surveys on the actual use of tax revenue.reddit.com
   https://www.reddit.com/r/luftablassen/comments/1x61xby/die_zuckersteuer_ist_ein_riesiger_scam/