Effect Of The Sugar Tax On Consumer 's Demand

The principle of Value additively would refute this unless the amalgamation resulted in some form of synergy or more effective utilisation of the assets of the combined companies. According to this case, Timken has following expected operational and financial synergies after the Torrington’s acquisition:

Within the framework of an oligopolistic market, mergers could also result from what can be described as a behavior of “oligopolistic reaction”. (Knickerbocker, 1973) defines oligopolistic reaction as “a corporate behavior by which rival firms in an industry composed of a few large firms counter one another’s moves by making similar moves themselves (Knickerbocker, 1973). Thus, if two firms in an oligopolistic industry merge, others might react by merging in turn (Cantwell, 1992), independently of whether shareholders will gain or lose as a result.

Omnicare, Inc., (NYSE: OCR) and CVS Health Corporation (NYSE: CVS), are two competitive firms in different industries. A press release announces that “CVS Health and Omnicare sign a definitive agreement for CVS Health to acquire Omnicare” ("CVS Health and Omnicare Sign a Definitive Agreement for CVS Health to Acquire Omnicare," 2015). The purpose of this paper is to discuss the merger of CVS and Omnicare. First, the paper describes the principal firms in the merger and the industry in which each operates. Secondly, the paper discusses the incentives to consolidate from the viewpoints of each firm. Thirdly, the writer explains the competitive environment in the industry and how it benefits the firms and society.

In Australia sugary drinks are not the root cause of obesity, contributing to a mere 1.8% of daily intake of kilojoules. For the obesity epidemic to reduce we need to target the issue, not a targeted product, reducing the sophisticated brainwashing sugary campaigns that children are exposed to from a very young age. Promoting education and the eye-opening, startling facts behind the sugar-coated products. You would never consume 16 packs of sugar yet we pour more coke in our glass, consume more sugar lollies and depend on sugar based products as our lifestyle. Where has our education and intelligence come into use? We need to encourage healthy lifestyle living primarily to young audiences to set up a strong foundation. Raising tax prices by 20% on one targeted product will not be enough, where is the knowledge! Milk based products, confectionery and cereals. Products that can have twice as much sugar, yet we categorise them as “healthy”, and not part of the tax gain. Overall, for an effective result, we need to accompany tax gain with education. To allow people to understand the consequences behind sugar and the dangerous attributes it holds. Together, this system can cause a much more efficient

Junk food is the go-to food when watching a movie or on a road trip. However, the research done suggests that Americans are satisfying their cravings with healthier alternatives these days. The article including this research states, “A 10 percent increase in the price of soda was associated with a 7.12 percent decrease in calories consumed from it, while the same increase in the price of pizza led to an 11.5 percent drop” (Fiore 2010). The numbers calculated in the study demonstrate a steady decrease in the consumption of junk food and drink. The decrease in consumption leads to a decrease in the intake of unhealthy and unneeded calories and sugar which are causing various health issues. A study done concluded that “An 18 percent tax on junk food would result in a 56-calorie decline in total daily energy intake . . . that would translate to about five pounds per patient per year, along with significant reductions in the risks of most obesity-related chronic diseases” (Fiore, 2010). America is not the only country that has thought of implementing a tax on unhealthy products, “More and more countries are adopting fat taxes in an effort to curb rising obesity rates. Both Denmark and Hungary have introduced a fat tax or junk food tax, and France is taxing sweetened drinks” (Sifferlin, 2012). These taxations are strongly

Wetter and Hodge, Jr. argue how childhood obesity is a vital issue that needs to be addressed as it puts children at risk for long-term health problems. The authors’ solution to lowering the rate of obesity is by taxing sugar-sweetened beverages. They relay information from the World Health Organization and make comparisons between other products that are heavily taxed in order to help support their argument. Wetter and Hodge, Jr. state that the World Health Organization declared that raising taxes on tobacco products was very effective in reducing the demand for tobacco use. They also discuss the legal components regarding sugar-sweetened beverages taxes. One of their ideas includes the sweeter the sugar-sweetened beverage is, the higher it

AN example, in 2008, Hewlett Packet purchased Electronic Data Systems to enhance the services aspect of the partnering technology offerings (Yurko, 1996). Marketing networks now give companies much wider customer access including overnight services. One such merger is the Takeda Pharmaceutical Inc. Although distribution chains work great to increase the bottom line, these mergers are not well received by federal agencies like the Federal Trade Commission. The concern being monopolization which is when one company controls too much of a given industry. Another driver of mergers is a desire for a leadership change. Sometimes the owner of the high technology firms simply wants to sale out and has problems finding a successor within to take the helm. Hence, a merger holds an

A strength from performing a merger is the ability to acquire a company’s unused debt. “Some firms simply do not exhaust their debt capacity. If a firm with unused debt capacity is acquired, the new management can then increase debt financing, and reap the tax benefits associated with the increased leverage” (Keown, 2005, pp. 23-4). Another strength is enabling Baderman Island to remove an ineffective management strategy or team. Baderman Island has the option to decide who stays with the merged company, and who is out the door. Often times, a weak management leading team is the problem the organization has not evaluated for its mediocre success. “The merger of two firms can result in an increase in market or monopoly power. Although this can result in increased wealth, it may also be illegal. The Clayton Act, as amended by the Celler-Kefauver Amendment of 1950, makes any merger illegal that results in a monopoly or substantially reduces competition. The Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission monitor all mergers to ensure that they do not result in a reduction of competition” (Keown, 2005, pp. 23-4).

Coming out of the first year of the merger, what new opportunities should the new “Defining Entity” pursue in order to grow business?

This extra weight has led to an increase in chronic diseases such as diabetes and a higher risk of cardiovascular disease (Leonhardt). Obesity is not just a “nice” or “correct” term for people who suffer from this ailment; Obesity is a dangerous medical condition that can lead to life-threatening diseases such as diabetes or even cardiac arrest. To make matters worse, diabetes does not kill fast. The estimated annual cost of healthcare for diabetes is $147 billion, approximately $1250 per household mostly in taxes (Leonhardt). This further expands the problem of obesity from a health to an economic spectrum that affects not only the sick but the healthy in a very direct way. A sugar tax will help alleviate the burden if the money raised is used towards paying the health care of the sick as well as reduce the cases of obesity and diabetes. A problem that not only pays itself but is reduced as time goes on. A penny-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages would lead to a 10 to 20 percent decrease in consumption and a 1.8 to 3.4 percent decrease in diabetes cases from 2013 to 2022. This decrease alone could save Americans between $320 million to $630 million in medical costs (O’Connor). Although not a major decrease in diabetes cases would follow up with this tax, the impact on the economy would be drastically reduced. A sugar tax would be just the beginning of a much bigger movement towards a healthier

Australia wake up!!! Childhood obesity has become a worldwide epidemic, and the condition is now reaching tipping points in developing as well developed countries such as Australia. Thirty years ago, less than five percent of children were considered obese. The latest level of obese and overweight Australian children is estimated between 25 and 28 percent! This means that millions of young adults and teens are experiencing problems that only adults face such as diabetes and depression related to weight gain. Overweight and obese children now are predicted to stay obese all the way into adulthood, and are anticipated to develop diseases like diabetes at a younger age than expected. Even with all this evidence to show that childhood obesity is a big problem that young people face, nothing has been done to stop it. There are many solutions to this epidemic and an obvious one is to place a tax on sugary drinks. Currently, over 26 countries have applied this tactic and some

Strokes, coronary heart disease, and type 2 diabetes are the leading causes of human death around the world (Micha, 1). These diseases are mainly caused by people having inadequate and unhealthy diets (Micha, 1). Local governments, such as the ones in cities like San Francisco or Albany have proposed a soda tax, which would increase the price of drinks at a rate of an extra penny per ounce. Even though this is called a ‘soda tax’, it impacts any sugar-sweetened drink, including energy drinks, sweetened teas, and sport drinks (Haspel, 1). Governments have said that they would use the profits from these taxes to help treat diabetes and stop obesity, but it’s not required of them to do so (Knight, 1). Starting a soda tax is not a durable way to

According to Moody (2015), the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) makes a statement that the increasing of Britain’s obesity rate has been a crucial issue. There are a quarter of British adults were overweight. The growth of British obesity rates causes cardiovascular disease which is dangerous for human’s life. Therefore, some measures must be taken. It could be argued that the taxation of unhealthy and drinks could reduce the death rate. In terms of faulty eating habits, the sugar taken by Britain is far beyond the normal level. As a result, British doctors highlight the urgency of controlling the consumption of unhealthy food and recommend government to impose a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. The British Medical Journal (BMJ) shows that there were 20% increasing of taxation could result in a reduction of obesity epidemic by 1.3% in the British (Briggs, et al., 2013). Undoubtedly, the taxation of unhealthy food and drinks could enhance people’s awareness of a healthier diet. Furthermore, it might contribute to the reduction of children obesity and related diseases. Many might argue that there are some indirect factors could cause obesity and related diseases. It is hard to define whether there are a positive or negative relationships between the taxation and the obesity and related diseases.

FTC claimed that based on various analysis and evidence, proposed merger between Staples and Office Depot will harm competition in office superstore chain market and raise market price which will lessen customers’ welfare. Nevertheless, two parties of merger casted doubt on every detailed statement, and interpreted that this merger will reduce costs, broaden scale of economies, improve economic efficiency, and optimize resource allocation, and then lower market price efficiently. Finally, the Court chose to agree with FTC’s contention.

The General Electric (GE) and Honeywell International (HI) case illustrates the complexities of structuring mergers and acquisitions when the combined firms are capable of exerting market influence that threatens the competitive landscape. While General Electric's CEO, Jack Welch, characterized the deal as, "This is the cleanest deal you'll ever see," European anti-trust regulators were not so inclined to view the transaction as harmless to competition (Elliot, 2001).