Kucinich Pushes To End Tax Subsidies For Junk Food Advertising

First Posted: 07-12-10 06:49 PM   |   Updated: 07-12-10 10:06 PM

What's Your Reaction?
Kucinich

As First Lady Michelle Obama spoke to the NAACP convention in Kansas City about childhood obesity Monday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) continued his work behind the scenes to stem junk food advertising to kids. A new bill introduced by Kucinich could raise billions of dollars in revenue to fund child nutrition and anti-obesity initiatives by preventing companies from writing off advertising of junk food targeted at kids.

Taxpayers are effectively subsidizing the spread of the obesity epidemic, Kucinich says, since under current federal law marketing expenses for the junk- and fast-food industries are tax-deductible. The legislation offers an easy win for increasingly hysterical deficit hawks, and would provide much-needed funds for Democrats looking to pass more aid programs, such as renewed unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless.

"I commend the First Lady for her dedication to stopping the epidemic of childhood obesity and for shedding light on the problem of food marketing to children," Kucinich wrote in a letter to colleagues. His measure, HR 4310, would prohibit any company from claiming a tax deduction for expenses derived from advertising to children any fast food or food of limited nutritional value. He cites a study suggesting that eliminating the federal subsidies of food advertising directed at youth could significantly reduce obesity rates.

But if deductions for food advertising expenses are considered subsidies, so are many other types of business expense write-offs, such as those for guns and cigarettes. Why should lawmakers single out the snack food industry?

Michelle Obama suggests it's a good place to start. She told her audience today that 50 percent of African-American children will develop diabetes, and a recent report on the state of physical education in the country shows that among children ages six to 11, 33 percent are overweight and 17 percent are obese.

As much as 50 percent of all television advertising during children's programs is dedicated to food and the vast majority of these advertisements are for junk food, according to a study by the Kaiser Family Foundation. The data showed that of over 8,000 ads aired during children's shows, zero advertised fresh fruits or vegetables.

The advertising seems to be paying off, judging by its volume and cost. The Institute of Medicine estimates that in 2004 more than $11 billion was spent on all types of food marketing and advertising, with approximately $10 billion devoted to food and beverage advertising aimed at children.

Story continues below
Advertisement

"Simply put, marketing to children works -- companies would not make such a substantial investment if it were ineffective," Kucinich said in a statement.

"Because young children lack the cognitive skills and abilities of older children and adults, they do not comprehend commercial messages in the same way as do more mature audiences, and, hence, are uniquely susceptible to advertising influence," according to a 2004 Institute of Medicine report.

Further, research has shown that early branding leads to strong brand loyalties that can last a lifetime and even override other forms of preference. Marion Nestle writes in her book Food Politics that eighth-grade students who stated their preferences for brand-name sodas over generic sodas were unable to identify those "favorites" during a brand-blind taste test, often choosing the generic brand instead.

The new legislation would direct the Secretary of the Treasury, in conjunction with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, to implement regulations regarding the definitions of fast food and junk food.

Approximately 50 countries, including Australia, Sweden, and Great Britain, already have laws limiting food advertising that targets youth. Kucinich's legislation has 25 cosponsors so far and is endorsed by the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood, the Obesity Action Coalition, and the American Public Health Association.

Get HuffPost Politics On Twitter, Facebook, and Google Buzz! Subscribe to the new HuffPost Hill newsletter!
As First Lady Michelle Obama spoke to the NAACP convention in Kansas City about childhood obesity Monday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) continued his work behind the scenes to stem junk food advertisi...
As First Lady Michelle Obama spoke to the NAACP convention in Kansas City about childhood obesity Monday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) continued his work behind the scenes to stem junk food advertisi...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
598
Pending Comments
0
View FAQ
Login or connect with: 
More Login Options
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »   (14 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
EvitaLuisa   09:44 PM on 7/12/2010
Dennis K, you are my hero! It should sicken all Americans as we look to the younger kids and children, how they are literally dying a (sometimes not so) slow death b/c of obesity. And many in my generation of 20, 30 year olds ..... one can only hang one's head and wonder.

How did America come SO far off the tracks?

Truly, I would term it: suicide by unhealthy eating.

 Read More...
photo
DenverJJ   01:13 PM on 7/17/2010
Child nutrition (cut off food subs$money ) should be folded into next versions of the health care bills.
DenverJJ
photo
Dan Storie   01:02 AM on 7/14/2010
I think Kucinich is part of a top secret government conspiracy. An evil plot concocted under the agenda of Alien UFO’s. Kucinich has joined forces with them (really, have you seen his wife? Clearly Aliens are rewarding him for his allegiance.) They plan to take over the planet and squeeze their competition, MARS candy bars, out of existence. Beware America your Snickers Bars and M&M’s are under attack! Call your Senators, call your Congressmen and tell them. . . NO wait! They’re all part of the conspiracy! THERE’S NO HOPE! All you can do is start hoarding your basements, cupboards and shelves with all the junk food you can get your hands on before it’s too late!

What? . . . You say you’ve already done that . . . Never mind.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SweetJudith   08:52 PM on 7/13/2010
Dennis, you and your lovely Elizabeth are the best! We support you all the way!!!!!
photo
TedEjr   01:47 PM on 7/13/2010
One man's tax deduction, or loophole, is another man's tax. It really is a zero sum game. And taxes should not be for the purpose of social engineering. NOR should business owners make operational decisions based upon tax considerations. It is artificial, and not sound business ADVANCEMENT.

That is why we need to totally overhaul the tax code. Go to a flat tax. Eliminate ALL deductions, except up to 2x the minimum wage for personal taxes. Tax businesses for all goods and services produced or sold in this country at a flat rate based upon revenue or value. ELIMINATE the separate pots for Social Security and Medicare. One tax for everything the government wants to purchase or provide.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
rikilii   05:14 PM on 7/13/2010
It would help if taxes only applied to businesses and the self-employed....that would eliminate a whole bunch of paperwork wasted on reporting and paying individual income taxes.
Joemmm   12:29 AM on 7/14/2010
It would be better if there was no corporate income tax. Just a VAT or a sales tax. It would make American made products more competitive against imports as they would cost less. Of course we should nto tax exports like most country do.
photo
Lisa Troup   10:32 PM on 7/14/2010
Amen Brother...AMEN! We NEED common sense Government!!!!!!!...Taxes where started 2 STOP the ROBBER BARONS, NOT HELP THEM! Keep up the GREAT work! O;) Maybe start a petition on Care2 .....Let's make it "We the people", not "We the CO.RPORATIONS!"
photo
TedEjr   10:42 PM on 7/14/2010
I appreciate the fan. But, but, but. I just lost my 69. I so liked that number. Now I am up to 70. I am soooo ambivalent about this.

Hehehehehehe.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ebanks84   01:11 PM on 7/13/2010
You go Kucinich and clean up this mess the Bush folks instigated against the people. You are our Hero for CHANGE and you will be rewarded greatly for what you do for mankind. Thank you Sir!
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
rikilii   05:15 PM on 7/13/2010
What's this have to do with "the Bush folks". Expenses for doing business have been tax-deductible for time immemorial.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ebanks84   05:20 PM on 7/13/2010
Junk food advertising to kids was what I was referring to, not just expenses.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
niceguysneverfinish   10:21 AM on 7/13/2010
He looks like H****R in that photo!
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Enroh Mot   10:26 AM on 7/13/2010
Maybe the Tea Party could put him on one of their signs, all they would have to do is add a mustache, and call him a Socialist gnome, that's about all they're good for.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
niceguysneverfinish   10:41 AM on 7/13/2010
I see... I don't see why not.
pdxist   10:19 AM on 7/13/2010
I think some commenters are confused, and I think this article intends for them to be.

First, know that Kucinich is incapable of passing anything of consequence. His entire 14-year record of success is passing a resolution honoring Casimir Pulaski, a resolution honoring John Gallagher, and a resolution giving a copy of a TV show to a museum. That's all he's gotten done in 14 years. Being a progressive is worthless if you can't legislate. Another Democrat would be better.

Second, there is no tax subsidy for marketing fast food to children. Rather, businesses pay taxes on their profits -- the money they have. Kucinich is proposing changing the entire model of business taxation so that businesses pay taxes on the money they spend -- the money they don't have anymore -- in order to try to prevent businesses from spending money, and he has chosen to target expenditures that are unpopular.

Like everything else he writes, this will not pass.
pdxist   10:24 AM on 7/13/2010
Oh, and I wasn't being sarcastic, he really has only passed three inconsequential items in 14 years:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/03/broken-record.html
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Enroh Mot   10:35 AM on 7/13/2010
It's hard to get anything done, when the majority in Congress are Wall Street tools, he always votes against funding for the war profiteers, we need more like him.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
henrypapillon   10:07 AM on 7/13/2010
Dennis looks like he has been eating too many potato chips..........
photo
Bude   09:52 AM on 7/13/2010
Tax subsidies for junk food advertising?

Who the heII thought that that is a good idea?
photo
4KixAfter6   10:18 AM on 7/13/2010
These big corporations don't pay any taxes anyway.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Enroh Mot   10:44 AM on 7/13/2010
And they're taxing my patience, and I'm sure they are yours.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
rikilii   05:09 PM on 7/13/2010
Somebody didn't think, or read, apparently.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lastshot54   09:42 AM on 7/13/2010
Could this be more of a no-brainer. Tell me there is a troll arguing against this legislation somewhere on this page.
CountingCoup   09:32 AM on 7/13/2010
He should be our President...
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Enroh Mot   09:55 AM on 7/13/2010
Fanned for that, if only he had more fans, but most people have been brainwashed by the corporate controlled MSM.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BonzaSheila   10:20 AM on 7/13/2010
Yes, he should.
photo
Core-Sample   09:30 AM on 7/13/2010
In reality, that junk should be discontinued anyway. Those companies should be responsible and start making healthier foods. America (especially the poor) has been trained since the 40's to eat cr@p foods. It's time to stop the addiction and to re-teach America how to eat better. Once again...money was the culprit. Do you want to eat chemicals or real food? It should be a crime that chemicals are allowed in the food chain. Silent spring.....
photo
lib4life19   10:03 AM on 7/13/2010
Talk to the FDA. They approve the chemical additives.

It's people that need to decide what they eat. If they begin eating healthy and reject the junk foods then the junk food companies will make healthier products. People began eating low fat, low sugar foods and the market provided. But it didn't solve the problem of weight gain. The less active American's become the more weight they will gain. Calories in have to equal calories out or weight gain or loss will occur. It doesn't matter what foods we eat as long as we get the vitamins, minerals and calories we need to survive.
mesaboy   09:27 AM on 7/13/2010
Look around you....all of North America is overweight. I've seen generations of people...grandparents, children and grandchildren walking down the aisles together in stores across the land......all overweight. The grandparents have already had knee and hip replacements, the kids are getting close, and the grandkids will follow in the same path. This is an epidemic. We need solutions....NOW!
JB1977   09:22 AM on 7/13/2010
I think the article calling it a "tax subsidy" is kind of misleading. It seems to imply the government is giving them money, when it's simply a deductible expense. Any time a company spends money on marketing, advertising, equipment, etc., they can deduct the expense from their profits. This is nothing different than any other business in America.
photo
Kinch Dedalus   09:41 AM on 7/13/2010
"But if deductions for food advertising expenses are considered subsidies, so are many other types of business expense write-offs, such as those for guns and cigarettes. Why should lawmakers single out the snack food industry?

Michelle Obama suggests it's a good place to start."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lastshot54   09:43 AM on 7/13/2010
Why should advertising be tax deductable? If it is, tax-payers are helping foot the bill. Last time I checked, they weren't sharing any profits with us.
photo
Disdain   09:53 AM on 7/13/2010
Why should it not? It's a business expense to help sell a product.
JB1977   11:42 AM on 7/13/2010
Virtually every expense a business incurs in support of producing its service/product is tax deductible. I can't see why ad expenses for a cereal company should be treated any differently than the plethora of expenses deducted by every other company in the United States, whether it's a baby food manufacturer, a book store, or a chemical manufacturer.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ThatsTheTheWayItIs   10:02 AM on 7/13/2010
Agree, I'm not sure it's the right way to go about it. I don't know any other expense that are not allowed to be deducted, although the IRS does set some limits, e.g. per-mile expense for auto usage.
photo
Stephen Feller   09:22 AM on 7/13/2010
"...under current federal law marketing expenses for the junk- and fast-food industries are tax-deductible..."

Why are my tax dollars going to subsidize any kind of advertising at all? So we're literally paying for corporations to convince us to kill ourselves with garbage food. That's great.
photo
Disdain   09:54 AM on 7/13/2010
It's not your tax dollars. Advertising for any product is an expense incurred by companies big and small. It's not revenue, therefore they don't pay taxes on it.

Twitter Edition