Re West Virginia Amendment to SSUTA to Provide a Definition英文资料.pdfVIP

April 28, 2010 Via Electronic Mail Mr. Scott Peterson, Executive Director Streamlined Sales Tax Governing Board 4205 Hillsboro Pike, Suite 305 Nashville, TN 37215 Re: West Virginia Amendment to SSUTA to Provide a Definition of Healthy Food Dear Mr. Peterson: The Food Marketing Institute (FMI)1 welcomes the opportunity to respond to the motion put forth by West Virginia to amend the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA) to provide a definition of “healthy food.” As discussed more fully below, FMI’s primary concerns are the narrowness of the definition, which is tantamount to taxing all categories of food, and the complexity of this category. I. Definition The proposed definition of “Healthy food” as put forth by West Virginia means food which: A. Meets the conditions for fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, and other nutrients as stated in 21 CFR § 101.65 or in any successor section of the Code of Federal Regulations; and B. Meets the conditions for sodium as stated in 21 CFR §101.65 or in any successor section of the Code of Federal Regulations. II. Intent of FDA “Healthy” Definition The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) definition at 21 CFR § 101.65(d)(2) of “healthy” is narrowly defined. The criterion set by FDA was narrow so that only limited foods would qualify to be able to advertise as “healthy.” If this item were to pass, it would essentially amount to a tax on most foods. Indeed, certain food stuffs such as bread, soup, yogurt, cheese, cereal and whole milk, considered by many to be “healthy” foods, may not even fall into the category of “healthy” as narrowly defined by FDA. The intent of the FDA definition was not to define to the 1 FMI conducts programs in public affairs, food safety, research, education and industry relations on behalf of its 1,500 member companies — food retailers and wholesalers — in the Unite