Table 2.
Difference of reduction in per-capita energy intake and proportion of daily energy intake from sugary drinks between sociod-emographic groups for each modelled taxation scenario, Canadian Community Health Survey-Nutrition (n 19 742)
| Flat-rate (20 %) tax | Tiered tax | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Absolute energy reduction (kcal) | Relative contribution reduction (pct-age points) | Absolute energy reduction (kcal) | Relative contribution reduction (pct-age points) | |||||
| Mean difference | 95 % UI | Mean difference | 95 % UI | Mean difference | 95 % UI | Mean difference | 95 % UI | |
| Age | ||||||||
| 2–18 years | −13 | –19, –8 | −0·7 | –0·9, –0·4 | −17 | –25, –9 | −0·9 | –1·2, –0·5 |
| 19 years or older | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Sex | ||||||||
| Male | −11 | –16, –6 | −0·1 | –0·2, 0·0 | −15 | –21, –8 | −0·2 | –0·3, 0·0 |
| Female | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Education | ||||||||
| Less than high school | 0 | –6, 5 | 0·0 | –0·2, 0·1 | −1 | –8, 6 | −0·1 | –0·3, 0·2 |
| High school | −4 | –8, –1 | −0·2 | –0·3, 0·0 | −6 | –11, –1 | −0·2 | –0·5, 0·0 |
| Certificate below bachelor’s degree | −4 | –7, –1 | −0·1 | –0·2, 0·0 | −5 | –10, –1 | −0·2 | –0·3, 0·0 |
| Bachelor’s degree or higher | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Food security | ||||||||
| Food insecure | −10 | –18, –3 | −0·4 | –0·7, –0·2 | −13 | –23, –3 | −0·6 | –0·9, –0·2 |
| Food secure | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref | ||||
| Income | ||||||||
| Quintile 1 (low) | −4 | –9, 1 | −0·4 | –0·6, –0·1 | −5 | –12, 1 | −0·5 | –0·8, –0·2 |
| Quintile 2 | 0 | –4, 4 | −0·2 | –0·3, 0·0 | 1 | –5, 7 | −0·2 | –0·4, 0·0 |
| Quintile 3 | −1 | –5, 3 | −0·2 | –0·4, 0·0 | −1 | –6, 4 | −0·2 | –0·5, 0·0 |
| Quintile 4 | −1 | –4, 3 | −0·1 | –0·3, 0·0 | 0 | –5, 5 | −0·2 | –0·4, 0·1 |
| Quintile 5 (high) | Ref | Ref | Ref | Ref | ||||