Health & Lifestyle Publications
April 30, 2019
Published by EPICENTER on April 30, 2019
Categories
Germany has overtaken the Czech Republic to become the EU’s most liberal country, according to the 2019 edition of the Nanny State Index. Finland remains the least free member state when it comes to drinking, smoking, vaping and food regulation, with Lithuania and Estonia in second and third place respectively.
September 10, 2018
Published by EPICENTER on September 10, 2018
Categories
Labour market flexibility may be characterized by the market participants’ abilities to deviate from standard labour regulations and typical forms of employment. Such possibilities may not only provide positive outcomes to both employers and employees, but they may also benefit the whole economy.
July 25, 2018
Published by IEA on July 25, 2018
Categories
There should be no debate about whether taxes on food, alcohol, tobacco and soft drinks (‘sin taxes’) are regressive. It can be easily demonstrated empirically, and countless studies have done so. As with most indirect taxes, they take a greater share of income from the poor than from the rich in all plausible scenarios.
May 7, 2018
Published by IEA on May 7, 2018
Categories
Our new league table of nanny state regulation shows that punitive taxation and excessive regulation of safer nicotine alternatives has increased across the EU. Finland and Hungary have the most excessive regulations for safer nicotine products, whereas Sweden and the UK have the most liberalized markets.
April 6, 2018
Published by IEA on April 6, 2018
Categories
Several local authorities in Britain have introduced ‘zoning laws’ to restrict fast food outlets within a certain distance of schools. Public Health England, the British Medical Association and the Mayor of London have all endorsed this policy as a way of tackling childhood obesity.
January 1, 2017
Published by IEA on January 1, 2017
Categories
This is the first study to estimate the annual savings that overweight and obese people bring UK taxpayers by dying prematurely (in 2016 prices). Ignoring these savings leads to substantial overestimation of the true burden of elevated body mass index (BMI) to the taxpayer.
