by Mia Palazzo CTNewsJunkie
HARTFORD, CT — A proposed tax on sweetened beverages returned to the Connecticut legislature on Monday, reviving a years-long debate over the balance between public health policy, small business burdens, and the goal providing free school meals to all students.
The Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 7273, which would impose a tax of $.02 per ounce on sweetened beverages, syrups and powders, with revenue earmarked to fund a universal free school meals program for all public school students.
Similar proposals have appeared in previous legislative sessions, including in 2017 and 2019, but have failed to pass.
The bill defines a sweetened beverage as any drink with added sugar or nonnutritive sweeteners, excluding 100% fruit or vegetable juices, milk-based beverages, infant formula, water, and medical beverages. If enacted, distributors would begin paying the tax on October 1, 2025.
“This proposed $0.02 per ounce tax on sweetened beverages, syrups, and powders would be significantly damaging to the restaurant industry and the families we serve,” said Scott Dolch, president and CEO of the Connecticut Restaurant Association. “This isn’t a minor adjustment — it represents a substantial increase in the cost of goods for our restaurants.”
Ranking Republican Rep. Joseph Polletta of Waterbury and Vice Chair Moira Raider, D-Branford, listen to testimony in the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee Public Hearing on Monday, April 14, 2025, at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford. Credit: Mia Palazzo / CTNewsJunkie
Dolch said the added costs could be especially harmful to Connecticut’s largely independent restaurant sector, noting that 97% of full-service restaurants in the state are independently owned. He estimated the tax would add $46.08 to the cost of a three-gallon “bag-in-the-box” used for fountain drinks and $1.35 to a two-liter soda bottle.
“Our industry has faced unprecedented challenges in recent years,” Dolch said, citing inflation, labor shortages, and the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. “Local restaurants simply cannot afford to absorb higher costs while also risking a decline in customers.”
In support of the bill, Sasha Davis, a policy analyst for the nonpartisan School and State Finance Project, wrote in written testimony that one in six children in Connecticut is uncertain where their next meal comes from.
“A statewide free school meals program presents Connecticut with an opportunity to invest in our students, our communities, and our state’s future,” Davis said. “When students and families have consistent access to food and nutrition, students are more engaged in learning, absenteeism decreases, and physical and mental health improves.”
Armani Brantley, a policy coordinator at End Hunger Connecticut!, emphasized the scale of the need, estimating that it costs $110 million annually to provide meals to all students in the state.
Brantley also touted CT Grown for CT Kids, a state program he said was beneficial to students.
“That’s … where students are able to actually participate in programs where they are able to grow their own food,” he said.
While the bill’s intent to address childhood hunger drew support, concerns remained over its impact on local businesses and working families.
“We understand and appreciate the intention behind dedicating revenue to a universal free school meals program,” Dolch said. “But placing this significant financial burden on local restaurants and consumers through a targeted beverage tax is not the right approach.”