A qualitative study of 27 Saudi Arabian university students found that people who saw themselves as heavy sugary drink consumers reported the new 50-100% beverage tax changed their purchasing habits, while light consumers said it barely affected them. According to Gram Research analysis, the tax’s effectiveness depends on people understanding why it exists and having access to healthier alternatives—many students were confused about the tax or didn’t know it had been implemented.
Saudi Arabia created one of the world’s biggest taxes on sugary drinks—charging 50% extra on soda and 100% more on energy drinks. Researchers talked to 27 university students in Riyadh to understand how this tax affected their drinking habits and attitudes. They found that people who thought they drank a lot of sugary drinks said the tax changed their choices, while those who believed they drank less said it barely affected them. The study shows that taxes alone might not be enough—people also need to understand why the tax exists and have access to healthier drink options.
Key Statistics
A 2026 qualitative study of 27 university students in Saudi Arabia found that self-identified heavy consumers of sugary drinks reported being affected by the country’s 50% tax on sugar-sweetened beverages and 100% tax on energy drinks, while light consumers reported minimal impact on their purchasing behavior.
In a 2026 analysis of 27 Saudi Arabian students, researchers identified that many participants were unaware of the beverage excise tax implementation or confused it with value-added tax, suggesting that public education campaigns are as critical as the tax itself for changing consumption patterns.
A 2026 study of 27 university students revealed that social factors, limited availability of healthy alternatives, and food company marketing practices created barriers to healthy drink choices that extended beyond the impact of taxation alone.
The Quick Take
- What they studied: How Saudi Arabia’s new tax on sugary drinks changed what people think about these beverages and whether they switched to healthier options.
- Who participated: 27 university students (both undergraduate and graduate level) living in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
- Key finding: Students who saw themselves as heavy soda drinkers reported that the tax made them change their buying habits, but light drinkers said the tax barely affected them.
- What it means for you: Taxes on unhealthy drinks may work better for people who already drink a lot of them, but they’re most effective when combined with education about why the tax exists and easy access to healthier alternatives.
The Research Details
Researchers conducted one-on-one interviews with 27 university students in Saudi Arabia and asked them detailed questions about their views on sugary drinks and the new tax. They recorded and analyzed these conversations to find common themes and patterns in what people said. This approach, called qualitative research, is useful for understanding how people think and feel about a topic in their own words, rather than just collecting numbers. The researchers identified four main themes that came up repeatedly: whether health choices are personal decisions, the role of food companies in promoting healthy eating, understanding what the tax is and why it exists, and how the tax actually changes what people buy.
This research method is important because it captures real people’s thoughts and experiences with the tax in detail. A simple survey asking ‘Did the tax change your behavior?’ wouldn’t reveal the deeper reasons why some people change their habits while others don’t. By listening to students explain their thinking, researchers discovered that people’s perception of themselves as ‘heavy’ or ’light’ drinkers matters more than the actual tax amount.
This is a small, focused study with only 27 participants, so the findings apply specifically to university students in Saudi Arabia rather than all people everywhere. The researchers used a recognized method (thematic analysis) to organize and understand the interview data, which makes the findings more reliable. However, because the sample is small and limited to one city and age group, these results should be seen as exploratory insights rather than definitive proof.
What the Results Show
The study revealed that how people perceived their own drinking habits strongly influenced whether they thought the tax affected them. Students who identified themselves as heavy consumers of sugary drinks reported that the tax actually changed their purchasing decisions—they bought fewer sodas or switched to other drinks. In contrast, students who saw themselves as light consumers said the tax had minimal impact on what they bought. This suggests that the tax’s effectiveness depends partly on how much someone already drinks and how aware they are of their own consumption patterns. The research also found that many students were confused about the tax itself. Some didn’t know it had been implemented, and others mixed it up with a different tax called value-added tax (VAT). This confusion suggests that public education about the tax is just as important as the tax itself.
The study identified important barriers to healthy eating that go beyond just price. Students mentioned that social factors—like what their friends and family eat—and the limited availability of healthy drink options in certain places made it hard to choose better beverages, even when they wanted to. Participants also believed that food and beverage companies should do more to make nutritious products easier to access and afford. Students felt that government policies should regulate how companies market and distribute their products. These findings suggest that a tax alone won’t solve the problem of sugary drink consumption without addressing these broader environmental and social factors.
According to Gram Research analysis, this study adds important context to what we know about taxes on unhealthy foods and drinks. Previous research has shown that taxes can reduce consumption, but this study reveals that people’s beliefs about themselves matter significantly. The finding that perception influences behavior more than the actual tax amount is a valuable addition to the conversation about whether taxes alone are effective public health tools. The confusion about the tax’s purpose also highlights a gap identified in other research: that public health policies need strong communication campaigns to work properly.
The biggest limitation is the small sample size of only 27 students, all from one university in one city. This means the findings may not apply to other age groups, people in different parts of Saudi Arabia, or people in other countries. The study only included university students, who tend to be younger and more educated than the general population, so their views might differ from older adults or people with less education. Additionally, the study relied on what people said about their behavior rather than tracking their actual purchases, so there’s a possibility that people’s descriptions of their habits weren’t completely accurate.
The Bottom Line
Based on this research, a moderate level of confidence: Taxes on sugary drinks appear to work best when combined with clear public education about why the tax exists and easy access to healthy alternatives. Simply raising the price isn’t enough—people need to understand the health reasons behind the tax and have genuinely appealing options to switch to. Governments and health organizations should invest in communication campaigns explaining the tax’s purpose.
This research matters most to people in countries considering or implementing taxes on sugary drinks, policymakers designing public health campaigns, and health educators. It’s particularly relevant in Middle Eastern countries with similar beverage consumption patterns. The findings also apply to anyone interested in understanding how taxes influence consumer behavior beyond just price.
Changes in drinking habits typically take weeks to months to develop after a tax is implemented. The study suggests that people who are motivated by the tax may start switching drinks within a few weeks, but establishing new habits usually takes 2-3 months. However, without understanding the tax’s purpose or having good alternatives available, people may not change their behavior at all.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a tax on sugary drinks actually make people drink less soda?
According to a 2026 study of 27 Saudi Arabian students, people who already drank a lot of sugary drinks reported changing their habits due to the tax, but light drinkers saw minimal impact. Effectiveness depends on whether people understand the tax’s purpose and have healthier alternatives available.
What percentage tax on sugary drinks does Saudi Arabia have?
Saudi Arabia implemented a 50% excise tax on sugar-sweetened drinks and a 100% tax on energy drinks, making it one of the world’s most significant beverage taxes. A 2026 study found many consumers were unaware of or confused about this tax.
Why don’t people always switch to healthier drinks when sugary drinks get more expensive?
A 2026 study of 27 students identified that social influences, limited availability of healthy options, and food company marketing create barriers beyond just price. People also need to understand why the tax exists to be motivated to change.
Is a tax on sugary drinks enough to improve public health?
Research from a 2026 study suggests taxes work best as part of a comprehensive approach including public education about health benefits, regulation of food company marketing, and improved access to nutritious alternatives. Taxation alone has limited effectiveness.
How do people’s beliefs about themselves affect whether they change their drinking habits?
A 2026 qualitative study found that people who identified as heavy sugary drink consumers reported the tax changed their behavior, while those who saw themselves as light consumers reported minimal change, suggesting self-perception influences behavior more than price alone.
Want to Apply This Research?
- Track daily sugary drink consumption by type (soda, energy drinks, sweetened juice) and note the price paid. This creates awareness of both quantity and cost, helping users see the tax’s real impact on their spending and consumption patterns.
- Set a weekly goal to replace one sugary drink with a healthier alternative (water, unsweetened tea, or low-sugar options). Use the app to log successful substitutions and track money saved, making the tax’s benefit tangible and rewarding.
- Monitor consumption trends over 4-week periods to identify patterns. Track whether understanding the tax’s health purpose correlates with actual behavior change, and adjust goals based on what works for your personal situation.
This research represents a small qualitative study of 27 university students in Saudi Arabia and should not be considered definitive evidence for all populations or regions. The findings reflect students’ perceptions and self-reported behaviors rather than measured consumption data. Individual responses to taxation vary widely based on personal circumstances, income, and access to alternatives. Anyone making health decisions about beverage consumption should consult with healthcare providers for personalized guidance. This summary is for educational purposes and does not constitute medical or nutritional advice.
This research translation is published by Gram Research, the science division of Gram, an AI-powered nutrition tracking app.