Cambridge IELTS 16 Test 3 Writing Task 2: Sample Answer

I strongly agree that raising the price of sugary products is a sensible way to improve public health, although it should not be the only measure governments adopt.

The strongest argument in favour is that price is one of the most reliable influences on purchasing habits. When a fizzy drink becomes noticeably more expensive, many shoppers switch to water or a cheaper unsweetened alternative, and manufacturers are pushed to reduce the sugar in their recipes to avoid the extra charge. This is not mere theory. After the United Kingdom introduced a levy on soft drinks, several well-known brands reformulated their products, and the amount of sugar sold in such beverages fell without any ban on consumer choice.

A second justification concerns the heavy burden that sugar-related illness places on society. Obesity, type 2 diabetes and tooth decay require expensive long-term treatment, which is usually funded by taxpayers, including those who eat healthily. Charging more for the products that contribute to these conditions shifts some of that cost to the companies and consumers responsible. The revenue raised can then be spent on school meals, sports facilities or health campaigns, creating a benefit beyond the initial deterrent.

Critics argue that such taxes hit low-income families hardest, because they spend a larger share of their earnings on food. This concern is valid, but poorer households also suffer the worst consequences of diet-related disease, so discouraging sugar consumption may actually serve them best, particularly if tax income is used to subsidise fresh fruit and vegetables.

In conclusion, higher prices for sugary food and drink change behaviour, push producers towards healthier recipes and fund preventive care. Provided that they are combined with education and affordable alternatives, I believe they are a justified and effective policy.