Fast Food Tax: If I Were a Policy Maker, This Is How I Would Change The System

By Coach Manny

Let’s talk about fast food. It’s convenient, it’s everywhere, and let’s be honest, it’s an easy target. But if I were a policymaker, I wouldn’t just slap a blanket tax on fast food and call it a day. I’d focus on making real change—a system that rewards progress and penalizes the status quo.  

Because here’s the truth: **not all fast food is created equal.**  

McDonald’s, KFC, and Taco Bell dominate the market with ultra-processed, high-sodium, nutrient-poor meals. But then you’ve got places like Chipotle or Sweetgreen, offering fresh, customizable options that are more aligned with what health-conscious consumers want.  

If we’re going to tax fast food, we need to do it objectively and strategically. That means punishing chains that refuse to evolve while giving credit to those that are trying to do better.  

The Problem With Blanket Policies

A blanket fast food tax sounds simple: penalize the whole industry and hope consumers make better choices. But simplicity doesn’t always work.  

For example, a burrito bowl from Chipotle can pack over 1,000 calories. Does that make it unhealthy? Not if those calories come from black beans, grilled chicken, and fresh vegetables. Compare that to a Big Mac meal with fewer calories but loaded with saturated fat, processed carbs, and almost no nutrients.  

If we tax both meals equally, we’re ignoring the nuances of what makes food healthy. Worse, we’re punishing restaurants that are genuinely trying to shift the narrative around fast food.  

That’s where a tiered tax system comes in.  

A Tiered Approach to Fast Food Taxation

Here’s how I’d structure it:  

Tier 1: Most Taxed (e.g., McDonald’s, KFC, Burger King)

These are the chains that do the bare minimum. They thrive on fried, processed, calorie-dense foods with almost no fresh options. Their meals are high in sodium, low in nutrient density, and designed for profit—not health.  

Why They’re Taxed:

  – Reliance on processed ingredients.  

  – Limited fresh or whole food options.  

  – High calorie-to-nutrient ratio (e.g., empty calories).  

  – Little transparency about ingredients and sourcing.  

Tax Rate:

The highest tier, designed to make consumers think twice about frequenting these places. Revenue from this tax could fund public health campaigns, healthcare costs, or subsidies for healthier food options in underserved areas.  

Tier 2: Small Tax (e.g., Panera, Subway)

These chains are making progress, but they’re not perfect. They offer fresh options and some transparency, but they still rely heavily on added sugar, large portions, and processed ingredients to deliver flavor.  

Why They’re Taxed:  

  – They meet some criteria (e.g., fresh vegetables, whole grains), but fall short on added sugar limits or portion control.  

  – While customizable, many menu items are still high in calories or processed.  

Tax Rate:

A moderate tax that reflects their efforts while encouraging them to do better.  

Tier 3: No Tax (e.g., Sweetgreen, Chipotle, CAVA)

These chains are the gold standard. They prioritize fresh, nutrient-dense ingredients, offer transparency about sourcing, and allow consumers to customize their meals to fit their health goals.  

Why They’re Exempt: 

  – Majority of menu items are made from fresh, whole ingredients.  

  – Customizable options encourage balanced eating.  

  – Sodium and added sugars are limited, and calorie counts align with portion sizes.  

  – They embody what fast food should look like in the future.  

Tax Rate:

None. These businesses are already aligned with public health goals, and taxing them would send the wrong message.  

What This System Achieves

1. Incentivizes Industry Change

Chains in Tier 1 or Tier 2 have a clear path to improve. Want to pay less tax? Start sourcing fresh ingredients, cut back on added sugar, and prioritize nutrient-dense menu items.  

2. Educates Consumers

By tying taxes to nutritional quality, we make it easier for consumers to see the differences between chains. It’s not just “fast food” anymore—it’s about the choices you’re making within that category.  

3. Funds Public Health

Revenue from Tier 1 taxes could go directly into funding programs that address food deserts, nutritional education, and preventative healthcare.  

4. Redefines Fast Food 

This isn’t just about punishing the McDonald’s of the world—it’s about pushing the industry to evolve. If we demand better, the market will adapt.  

Let’s Be Real 

This system isn’t perfect. There will always be gray areas—chains that toe the line between tiers or game the system. But doing nothing isn’t an option.  

If we want to make meaningful change, we have to start somewhere. A tiered taxation system creates accountability, rewards progress, and sets a new standard for what fast food can and should be.  

At Northeast Health Performance, we know that better choices—whether in fitness, food, or life—start with clear, actionable plans. If I were a policymaker, this is how I’d start rewriting the rules.  

Because at the end of the day, it’s not just about what we eat. It’s about building a culture that values health, transparency, and the power of choice.  

What do you think? Should fast food be taxed based on how healthy it is? Let’s talk about it!  

Schedule your free intro

Talk with a coach about your goals, make a plan to achieve them.

Fill out the form below to get started

Take the first step towards getting the results that you want

By providing your phone number, you agree to receive text messages from NorthEast Health Performance