Sin Tax in The PH

SIN TAX IN THE PH
PROS CONS
Sin tax is also health tax.
An increase in the price of sin products would
mean lesser people would be able to afford
such items. Since the price of cigarettes
individually is so affordable (around 3-4php per
stick), underprivileged citizens such as the poor
are still able to afford it and they still do
purchase it, while neglecting their health
priority. By the time that they do get sick, they
turn to the government and demand for free
medical treatment. Such individual
irresponsibility is regretted therefore, by
increasing the taxes (thereby increasing the
price on cigarettes and alcohol), fewer people
would opt to buy them instead of basic
necessities. Aside from that, an individual
coming from the poor sectors of society would
be forced to think about where his money
would go: buying cigarettes or buy food
instead? Not only are they being forced to
think rationally, but they are also being
directed to responsible health care for
themselves. Tax increase for such products is a
way for discouraging harmful behavior.
(Cause hello, we dont want our Filipino
people, whether they smoke or not (cos
remember, even if you dont smoke, just by
sitting beside someone who smoke would
already make you vulnerable to many
illnesses) to have higher risks of cancer and
smoking and drinking related illnesses. A sickly
country does not pose well with the
international community. (Health is wealth
kuno. :P)
In its sense, levying a tax on any kind of
product puts a value on the consumption of
that product. Increasing taxes does not
automatically discourage everyone from
consuming sin products, but the opposite
could also happen. No matter how much
increase would be levied, it only motivates
people who can afford it even more. This is
because people feel that paying their taxes is
already a way of justifying that they dont
need to feel guiltythat as long as they paid
their taxes, then they dont have anything else
to worry about which is not exactly good.
(You cant exactly say to a person that you
want him/her to stop smoking, because he/she
could just retort back, Im helping the
government because I pay my taxes!) So its
not really a matter if you have paid your dues
or not, an increase does not automatically
discourage individuals.

In relation to that and with regards to the
health care program that would benefit from
the tax increase, advertising the increased sin
tax by saying that it would increase tax
revenues that would be used for the health
care program would all the more encourage
consumption. People (who can afford it)
would think that they are doing society a favor
by buying sin products since a portion of their
money would go to health budgets anyway.
And, assuming that these people who can
afford to buy numerous sin products could also
afford to pay their own medical bills, using sin
tax to discourage them would be very difficult
and may even be futile in the end.
For those individuals who belong to the
middle- to upper-classes of society who can
still and are still willing to buy such commodities
despite the price increase, all the more will the
government benefit from them. Since one of
the initial purposes of increasing sin tax is by
increasing tax revenues, the government will
use the increased tax collected from the
industry in order to have a greater budget for
health care, specifically the Universal Health
Care Program. Government actions and
policies are inherently good-natured and most
of the time for the betterment of public safety
and welfare. The state levies taxes on products
Profit-oriented companies and manufacturers
are not in favor of having such increase
because that would create an effect on their
sales and revenues. Since the tax increase, the
market for sin commodities would shrink (since
diba nga hindi na makakabili ung poorer
people) thereby creating a dent on the profit
charts of the suppliers. So how is that bad for
the Philippine economy? It is bad because the
Philippine government actually recognizes the
big contribution of the sin industry. Major
cigarette producers like Marlboro and Fortune
were listed as the biggest corporate taxpayers
in the country. A loss in their profit would also
mainly for 2 reasons: 1) protection & 2)
revenue collection. Since there are 2
nd
and 3
rd

degree harms of tobacco and alcohol,
government action is necessary as to lessen
and diminish these harms while at the same
time increasing tax revenues which is helpful
for the countrys development in the long run.
mean a decrease in the tax they are required
to pay, which in turn, is bad for the
government. It has already become part of
the Filipino lifestyle to smoke and drink
especially during festivities, thats why the
market for sin products is big. Increasing taxes,
assuming that it could discourage
consumption, would also decrease the taxes
collected therefore this law is not the way to
go.

PAMBARA QUESTIONS
PROS CONS
If the government really wants to encourage a
healthier lifestyle, why not ban cigarette
smoking and alcohol drinking instead?
An added law protecting the countrys health
is better than no addition at all. If you didnt
want a tax increase of sin products, would you
please provide us a present law that would
actually be beneficial for the overall health of
the country?
It is not a full-proof plan. As of date, there are
still many people coming from the lower
classes of society that still buy sin items
because they can still afford them (like 5php
per stick, pwede pa right?) So how could you
exactly say that it could discourage
consumption when even young individuals are
still able to afford them?
The current mechanisms and policies
regarding health safety and responsible
drinking are insufficient. Therefore, dont you
think that by attacking the root causes of these
accidents and illnesses (DUI/drunk driving,
excessive smoking), we would be able to
lessen them in return? Please tell us how not
applying this law would still decrease the
number of cancer patients (due to smoking)
and deaths due to drunk driving.
How exactly does increasing the taxes on sin
products help tobacco farmers? (since isa sila
sa mga victims ng tobacco industry sa PH)
Do you think the current mechanisms of the
government (using the media advertisements,
yung mga government warning stickers sa
cigarettes and alcohol bottles) is enough in
discouraging consumption?
Dont you think that by increasing prices, there
is an even greater demand for smuggled
products since they are much cheaper, which
in turn is more dangerous?
You said that the government is in gratitude for
the huge amounts of corporate taxes
collected from big sin industries such as
Marlboro and Fortune. How do these
companies actually help the overall health of
society since you said so yourself that they are
profit-oriented and not service-oriented?
Instead of increasing taxes for sin commodities,
why not increase corporate taxes for
producers and manufacturers of sin products
instead? (for example, increase the tax rate for
Malboro Corp. in order to discourage
production or selling of cigarettes)

Dont you think that its very contradicting that
you increased taxes because you want to
discourage consumption, but you want to
increase tax revenues to have a bigger

budget for health care? (You could increase
tax revenue if you increase consumption, but
in this case, you want to discourage
consumption which would, in theory, not
increase tax revenue.)

Sin Tax in The PH

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sin Tax in The PH

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sin Tax in The PH

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SIN TAX IN THE PH

You might also like