What if a simple change in the way we tax groceries could save 700 lives every year and cut diet-related CO₂ emissions by 700,000 tonnes—all without costing you more at the checkout? That’s the surprising result from a new study looking at food taxes on red meat and sugary drinks, paired with removing taxes on healthy foods.

How Food Taxes Could Work

The idea is pretty straightforward: by adding taxes to foods that are linked with health problems and higher emissions—like red meat and sugary drinks—and taking away taxes on healthy staples like fruits and vegetables, our diets might shift for the better. Researchers found this approach could save hundreds of lives by lowering the rates of heart disease, diabetes, and other diet-related illnesses. Even better, it could help fight climate change by slashing the emissions tied to what we eat.

If you’re curious about the science behind food and health, groups like the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health offer easy-to-understand guides on building healthier plates.

The Case for Taxing Red Meat and Sugary Drinks

Why focus on red meat and sugary drinks? Red meat is linked not just to health risks but also to a big environmental footprint. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, livestock farming is a significant source of greenhouse gases. Meanwhile, sugary drinks are tied to rising rates of obesity and diabetes worldwide.

Here’s why these taxes could make a difference:

• Healthier choices: Higher prices for less healthy foods may nudge people toward better options.
• Lower emissions: Eating less red meat means less greenhouse gas from livestock.
• Balanced budgets: Removing taxes on healthy foods helps keep overall grocery costs steady.
• Life-saving impact: The study estimates 700 premature deaths could be prevented each year.
• Environmental benefit: Up to 700,000 tonnes of CO₂ emissions could be avoided annually.

Will This Policy Hit Your Wallet?

One of the biggest concerns about food taxes is affordability. Groceries are expensive enough as it is, right? That’s why the study’s most interesting finding is that these tax changes could balance out. By taxing red meat and sugary drinks but removing taxes on healthy foods, the average shopper’s bill wouldn’t actually go up.

Countries like Mexico and Hungary have already tried versions of these taxes. While it’s not a fix-all, early results show people do start to buy fewer taxed items, especially sugary drinks.

Real Life in the Grocery Aisle

Imagine this: you’re at the supermarket deciding between steak for dinner or a veggie stir-fry. You notice the price of red meat has gone up a bit, while fruits and veggies are actually cheaper. That small nudge might be all it takes to swap out steak for a veggie-packed meal. Multiply that across millions of shoppers, and you’ve got a recipe for big changes in public health and the environment.

A friend of mine once joked about the “lettuce tax,” grumbling that it always seemed like the healthy stuff cost more. If policies like this go mainstream, maybe one day we’ll be grumbling about the “steak tax” instead—but with a healthier fridge and a greener planet to show for it.

What’s Next for Healthy Food Policy?

Experts agree that changing how we price food isn’t a silver bullet. But it can be part of a bigger toolkit for fighting chronic diseases and climate change. Other strategies—like clearer food labeling or supporting local farmers—can work alongside smart food taxes.

For more information about the links between diet and climate, check out resources from the World Health Organization and EAT-Lancet Commission.

So, what would you do if your grocery bill stayed the same—but it helped your health and the planet? Would these food taxes change what ends up in your shopping cart?