United States: Philadelphia's New Soda Tax Is Being Challenged

On June 20, 2016, Philadelphia Mayor James Kenney approved the "Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax," commonly known as the "soda tax."1 The ordinance imposes a 1.5 cent per ounce tax on sugar-based drinks starting on January 1, 2017. This amounts to 24 cents per 16-ounce bottle, or roughly $1.01 per two-liter bottle. This ordinance is the first successful attempt to tax soda beverages in a major city in the United States.2 The Philadelphia Department of Revenue recently has released proposed regulations for the new tax.3 On September 14, 2016, a complaint was filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas by a group including the beverage industry, restaurants and individuals to try to prevent enforcement of the tax.4

Overview of the Soda Tax

There are two main components of the soda tax: (i) the types of beverages subject to tax and (ii) the individuals affected by the tax.

Beverages Subject to Tax

Under the ordinance, any sugar-based non-alcoholic beverage is subject to tax.5 The definition of sugar is so expansive that it includes sugar substitutes found in diet and lowcalorie drinks.6 The law expressly taxes:

  • soda;
  • non-100 percent fruit drinks;
  • sports drinks;
  • flavored water;
  • energy drinks;
  • pre-sweetened coffee or tea; and
  • mixers.7

The ordinance only allows exclusions for: (a) baby formulas; (b) medical foods defined by law; (c) drinks with more than 50 percent milk; (d) drinks with more than 50 percent fresh fruit or vegetables; (e) unsweetened drinks; and (f) customer-made syrup drinks.8 Although the Department's proposed regulations allow exclusions for some milk substitutes, like soy milk, other popular substitutes—such as almond milk and cashew milk—do not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture standards of milk nutrients and thus do not qualify for an exclusion.9 Thus, the law reaches drinks well beyond what a consumer typically considers to be a "soda" or "sugary" drink.

Imposition of Tax

The ordinance focuses its enforcement up the distribution chain for drinks that are supplied, acquired, delivered or transported for the purpose of selling in retail within the City of Philadelphia to consumers.10 First, distributors must register with the City.11 Second, dealers can only purchase from registered distributors.12 The distributor, whether or not located within the City, will be liable for the per ounce tax.13 If the dealer purchases from a non-registered distributor, then the dealer will be liable for the tax.14

Although the ordinance does not place a direct tax on consumers, it is still uncertain whether the consumers will ultimately bear the burden of the tax. Distributors can pass the tax on to the dealers by raising distribution prices, and the dealers can pass the tax on to the consumers by raising retail prices. This pass-through burden potentially can have a determinative outcome on the ordinance's legality. According to the Department, the first filing and payment will be due on February 20, 2017.15

Challenges to the Soda Tax

As it became likely that the soda tax would be enacted, impacted groups developed legal arguments concerning how such a tax might be challenged. Soon after the tax was enacted, a challenge to the tax was filed on September 14, 2016.16 This challenge advances a variety of arguments steeped in two general assertions: (i) the Pennsylvania sales tax preempts the imposition of the Philadelphia soda tax; and (ii) the Pennsylvania Constitution's Uniformity Clause prohibits the imposition of such tax.

Challenge #1: State Preemption of Sales Tax

The first challenge to the soda tax comes under the preemption principle. In essence, municipalities cannot tax goods without the state's permission. In Pennsylvania, a municipality's sole power to tax derives from either the Sterling Act of 1932 (applicable to Philadelphia), or the Local Tax Enabling Act of 1965 (applicable to municipalities other than Philadelphia). A municipality would not, otherwise, have the power to impose a tax. Thus, a municipality has to request the state legislature to pass enabling legislation. For example, Philadelphia has a higher wage tax than the rest of the state, only because the Commonwealth passed enabling legislation.

The beverage industry argues the soda tax is preempted by the Pennsylvania sales tax.17 Because the state already taxes these drinks through the sales tax, the municipality cannot implement an additional tax without the state's approval. The tax is triggered by a potential future sale to Philadelphia consumers, so the tax has a close relation to the Pennsylvania sales tax.

The City argues that the soda tax is not preempted because it does not constitute a sales tax.18 The City distinguishes the sales tax from the soda tax in two ways. First, the soda tax is imposed on distributors, while the sales tax is imposed on consumers. Second, the soda tax is measured on a per ounce basis, while the sales tax is solely based on price.

Prior to the challenge to the tax, former Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille wrote commentary explaining why the soda tax is preempted by the state's sales tax.19 Castille describes the soda tax as a "thinly disguised sales tax" because the tax will be passed on to the consumers. The City has argued that the soda tax is intended to be solely imposed on distributors and the tax will not be passed on to consumers.20 Castille refutes the City's contentions as implausible because "rational sellers" will not take a hit on their profit margin.21

Another argument considered by those aggrieved by the soda tax claims that such tax conflicts with the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (food stamps) that prohibits participating states from collecting state or local sales tax on food purchases made under this program.22 Under Pennsylvania law, beverages that are eligible under SNAP are exempt from the Pennsylvania Soft Drink Tax as well as the City's additional sales and use tax.23 Preemption again comes into play here, as an argument can be made that the soda tax is preempted by the state soft drink tax exemption.

According to the complaint, the soda tax "implicates two types of preemption."24 Under the concept of express preemption, "a state statute includes language that specifically bars or otherwise limits local authorities from acting on a particular subject matter already subject to state regulation."25 The other type of preemption, conflict preemption, occurs "where a local enactment (a) irreconcilably conflicts with or stands as an obstacle to the execution of the full purposes of a state statute or (b) renders compliance with a state statute impossible."26

The complaint requests declaratory judgment and injunctive relief barring enforcement of the soda tax based on: (i) express preemption under the Sterling Act; (ii) conflict preemption by the state soft drink tax; and (iii) conflict preemption by the state soft drink tax exemption for purchases under SNAP.27

Challenge #2: State Constitution's Uniformity Clause

The second challenge to the soda tax ordinance derives from the Uniformity Clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution.28 The Uniformity Clause requires a class of goods to be taxed at the same rate throughout the state.29 Classification of goods becomes an important task because if certain goods are classified differently than other goods, then these goods can be taxed at a different rate. The City argues that the soda tax does not violate the Uniformity Clause because there is a legitimate distinction between classes of goods taxed.30 In essence, there is a clear distinction between sugar-based drinks and unsweetened drinks.

The beverage industry argues that there is no distinction of goods for the distributors and retailers.31 The argument highlights that if the tax is targeted at distributors, the analysis of the class of goods should also be with respect to those in the distribution chain. In his commentary, the former Chief Justice explains this distinction by stating that a distributor outside Philadelphia will inevitably pay a different tax rate for the same goods sold in Philadelphia than those sold outside Philadelphia.32

The complaint addresses the uniformity argument by specifically requesting declaratory judgment and injunctive relief barring enforcement of the soda tax based on nonuniformity through: (i) "the unequal burden on beverages at the retail level and the distributor level;" (ii) "the creation of an unreasonable taxpayer class and unequal burden on distributors;" (iii) the "unequal burden on retailers;" and (iv) "the unequal burden on consumers."33


The beverage industry is challenging the soda tax to prevent a domino effect in other major cities. Berkeley, California is the only other city in the United States that has a similar beverage tax.34 However, Philadelphia's law affects a much bigger market (nearly 15 times larger) and has a potential domino effect in other cities. Currently, Oakland, California has a similar tax initiative—but through a ballot vote this November—and other large cities like Seattle and Portland are considering similar legislation.35

The beverage industry reportedly has spent approximately $10 million attempting to prevent the soda tax in Philadelphia.36 Also, the beverage industry has successfully defeated a New York law that limited the maximum size of similar beverages. Thus, it is not surprising that the beverage industry is challenging Philadelphia's soda tax in court.

Nonetheless, the tax will likely be enforced in the meantime despite the pending litigation, which may take years to resolve. A court will not grant a preliminary injunction unless there is a risk of irreparable harm and there is a substantial likelihood the legal challenge will succeed. At this point, distributors should start registering with the City and dealers will need to plan to purchase from a registered distributor.


1 PHILA. CODE §§ 19-4100 to 19-4108, enacted by Bill No. 160176, June 20, 2016.

2 See Allison Aubrey, Taxing Sugar: 5 Things to Know About Philly's Soda Tax, NPR, June 9, 2016, 3:08 pm (stating New York and San Francisco tried to impose similar soda tax but failed to pass in council).

3 Proposed Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax (SBT) Regulations, Philadelphia Department of Revenue, released Sep. 9, 2016. These proposed regulations are available at https://alpha.phila.gov/documents/proposed-sweetened-beverage-tax-regulations.

4 Williams v. City of Philadelphia, complaint filed in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Sep. 14, 2016; see also Alison Burdo, Lawsuit: Phila.'s Soda Tax Will Cost Pa. Up to $7.8M, Violates State Law, PHILA. BUSINESS JOURNAL, Sep. 14, 2016; Claudia Vargas and Tricia L. Nadolny, Beverage Association Sues to Block Soda Tax, PHILLY.COM, Sep. 14, 2016.

5 PHILA. CODE § 19-4101(3).

6 Diet drinks were added to the ordinance in order to lower the originally proposed tax of 3 cents per ounce. The compromise achieves the purpose of expanding the tax base and reaching a wider range of beverages, thus allowing for a 1.5 cent per ounce tax instead. Additionally, by including diet drinks, the ordinance also addresses potential Uniformity Clause issues of taxing only sugary drinks.

7 PHILA. CODE § 19-4101(3)(d).

8 PHILA. CODE § 19-4101(3)(c).

9 The proposed regulations also explicitly define beverages that do not qualify for an exclusion as medical foods, such as Gatorade, coconut water, Muscle Milk, Smartwater or Vitaminwater. Proposed SBT Regs., Art. I, § 102, released Sep. 9, 2016.

10 PHILA. CODE § 19-4103(1).

11 PHILA. CODE § 19-4102(2).

12 PHILA. CODE § 19-4102(1).

13 PHILA. CODE § 19-4105(1). Registered distributors, or the taxpayer, must file monthly returns by the 20th of the following month, detailing the fluid amount of sugar drinks and amount of tax generated. Proposed SBT Regs., Art. V, § 501.

14 PHILA. CODE § 19-4105(2). Dealers are obligated to assure that the distributor is registered and formal notifications (with liquid amounts and tax amounts) are exchanged at the time of purchase. Proposed SBT Regs., Art. IV, § 403.

15 For additional information on the tax, see the Philadelphia Department of Revenue's Web site at https://alpha.phila.gov/services/business-taxes/sweetened-beverage-tax.

16 Williams v. City of Philadelphia, complaint filed in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Sep. 14, 2016.

17 See Beverage Assoc. of Philadelphia, Memorandum on Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax from Sozi Pedro Tulante, City Solicitor, to James F. Kenney, Mayor ("Industry Memo"), Mar. 1, 2016 (arguing Solicitor flawed in interpreting Uniformity Clause and preemption issues).

18 See Sozi Pedro Tulante, Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax ("Solicitor Memo"), Mar. 1, 2016 (describing reasons tax can be enacted notwithstanding legal concerns).

19 Ronald D. Castille, Commentary: Mayor, Council Pushing Unconstitutional Soda Tax, PHILLY.COM, June 16, 2016.

20 See Solicitor Memo, supra note 18.

21 See Castille, supra note 19.

22 Williams v. City of Philadelphia, filed in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Sep. 14, 2016; 7 U.S.C. § 2013(a).

23 72 PA. STAT. § 7204(46).

24 Williams v. City of Philadelphia, complaint filed in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Sep. 14, 2016.

25 Id.

26 Id.

27 Id.

28 Id. PA. CONST. art. VIII, § 1 states: "All taxes shall be uniform, upon the same class of subjects, within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax, and shall be levied and collected under general laws." For further discussion and application of Pennsylvania's Uniformity Clause, see Vito Cosmo Jr., Matthew Melinson & Patrick Skeehan, The Power Behind Pennsylvania's Uniformity Clause, PA. CPA JOURNAL, Fall 2015.

29 See Stephen St. Vincent, Is the Soda Tax Legal?, THE PHILADELPHIA CITIZEN, June 15, 2016; see also Castille, supra note 19.

30 See Solicitor Memo, supra note 18; see also Tricia L. Nadolny, Kenney's Soda Tax Expected to Face Court Fight, PHILLY.COM, June 20, 2016.

31 See Industry Memo, supra note 17.

32 See Castille, supra note 19.

33 Williams v. City of Philadelphia, complaint filed in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas on Sep. 14, 2016.

34 See Aubrey, supra note 2 (comparing Berkeley's population of 112,000 versus Philadelphia's 1.5 million).

35 See Leon Stafford, Bloomberg Backs S.F., Oakland Soda Taxes, AJC.COM, June 20, 2016, 12:36 pm.

36 See Vargas and Nadolny, supra note 4.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Grant Thornton LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Grant Thornton LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions