Nine Union ministers against Klingbeil’s sugar tax: the letter to Merz in full

On 11 October 2026 nine ministers from the Union came out against the planned sugar tax in a letter. It is addressed to Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz, the head of the Federal Chancellery, Nina Warken, and the chairman of the Union parliamentary group, Thorsten Frei. The signatories head the agriculture or consumer affairs departments in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Hesse, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia. BILD and WELT reported on the letter first.^[1][2] It is available to the editorial team. We document it in full at the end.

The key sentence reads: “We, as the ministers of the Union-led agriculture departments, declare ourselves against an excise duty on products containing sugar.” The tax relies on steering by the state and does not fit “the line agreed within the coalition”. Instead of a tax the signatories want to rely on nutrition education, personal responsibility, information and innovation. They demand that the overall assessment of the federal reduction strategy, planned for the end of 2026, be awaited.

“A sugar tax, by contrast, relies on steering by the state and unnecessarily places an additional burden on the purchase of particular foods.”

What the Union promised

In their 2025 election manifesto the CDU and CSU ruled out such a tax in substance: “We rely on nutrition education and good information, but not on ineffective advertising bans or steering taxes.”^[3] In February 2025 Friedrich Merz said: “I rule out tax increases. They would be poison for our economy.”^[4]

The coalition agreement does not mention a sugar tax. In the section “Environment and nutrition” stands the sentence the ministers invoke: “We rely above all on voluntary action, incentives and personal responsibility.”^[5] At the CDU party conference in February 2026 a motion from Schleswig-Holstein calling for a sugar tax failed to find a majority.^[6][7]

What the coalition decided

The tax is planned nonetheless, and not only by the finance minister. On 29 April 2026 the federal cabinet under Merz adopted budget benchmarks providing for a sugar levy from 2028 as a consolidation measure.^[8] On 10 July 2026 the Bundestag passed the act on stabilising health insurance contributions. Its federal subsidy counts on revenue from a “steering tax on sugar-sweetened drinks”: 650 million euros in 2027, and 450 million euros from 2028.^[9] Of 208 members of the Union parliamentary group, 207 voted in favour.^[10]

The draft of the tax act was put forward by finance minister Lars Klingbeil (SPD). At the beginning of October the Chancellery held it back. Government circles said it departed from the recommendation of the health finance commission and was “in this form no longer capable of commanding a majority within the government”.^[11] On 2 October the finance ministry said: “There is an agreement within this coalition that a tax on sugary drinks will be introduced.” The deputy government spokesman added that the tax itself was not in question, but there was “a need for discussion about its design”.^[12]

According to a Bild report of 9 October, the coalition is said to have agreed on a compromise: a start on 1 July 2027, no third tax band, and an exemption threshold of 70,000 litres a year. This has not been officially confirmed.^[13] The cabinet is said to be due to discuss it on 14 October.^[14]

What in the statements holds up

The British studies compare the course of events after the levy was introduced with a calculated development without it. They show associations, not proof of a cause.^[17][18]

The letter in full

The letter is available to the editorial team as a PDF. WELT and BILD quoted from it; every passage quoted there matches this version word for word.^[1][2] No confirmation from the ministries was available at the time of publication. We reproduce the text unchanged; we have removed only a duplicated full stop. What follows is a translation of the German original, which is the authoritative wording.

Sender: Ministry for Rural Affairs, Agriculture and Heimat of Baden-Württemberg, the Minister. To: Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz; head of the Federal Chancellery, Federal Minister Nina Warken; chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, Thorsten Frei. Date: 11 October 2026. Subject: sugar tax.

Dear Federal Chancellor, dear Federal Minister, dear chairman of the parliamentary group,

the question of taxing foods containing sugar is currently being discussed critically from various angles. We, as the ministers of the Union-led agriculture departments, declare ourselves against an excise duty on products containing sugar.

In doing so we are not only in accord with the resolutions of the CDU federal party conference in Stuttgart of February 2026, at which the introduction of a sugar tax was rejected.

The coalition agreement is unambiguous in its nutrition chapter: “We rely above all on voluntary action, incentives and personal responsibility.” At the same place the aim has also been set that consumers should be able to decide for themselves. Nutrition education plays a particular role in this. A sugar tax, by contrast, relies on steering by the state and unnecessarily places an additional burden on the purchase of particular foods. That does not fit the line agreed within the coalition.

We should also like to draw attention once again, urgently, to the present situation of farming businesses. Against the background of the economic situation of farms, with rising costs for fertiliser and diesel, an intervention in the sugar market with the consequence of falling returns cannot be explained to anyone. The proposed tax also disregards the fact that in the production of fruit juices the addition of sugar is in many cases (e.g. blackcurrant, quince, rhubarb) necessary in order to obtain a marketable product. The introduction of the tax means, for one thing, that drinks manufacturers will have to adjust their recipes, which is an economic cost that has to be taken into account. For another, it does not ensure that the aim of combating obesity is effectively achieved, as experience in other nations shows. Even in the United Kingdom, which is often held up as a model, no population-wide improvements in health are so far apparent, neither in the development of obesity generally nor in the burden of disease attributed to sugar-sweetened drinks.

A balanced diet with moderate sugar consumption is decisive in avoiding various health problems. In order to achieve more reduction of sugar there are various routes, and not only the one that runs through regulatory law. We do not consider an additional tax on sugar or soft drinks to be the right route. We rely, again with reference to the coalition agreement, on nutrition education, personal responsibility, information and innovation.

Eating behaviour is not steered by additional levies. Under the national strategy for the reduction of, and innovation in, sugar, fats and salt in processed products (NRI), the food industry committed itself to reducing sugar, fats, salt and energy in its products by 2025. Initial results show that soft drinks, for example, contain on average almost 15 per cent less sugar than in the 2018 base year.

That corresponds to the target agreement with the drinks manufacturers. It is therefore right to await the overall assessment of the national strategy for reduction and innovation planned for the end of 2026 and the conclusions of the BMLEH.

Yours sincerely

gez. Marion Gentges MdLMinister for Rural Affairs, Agriculture and Heimat of Baden-Württemberg

gez. Michaela Kaniber MdLBavarian State Minister for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Tourism

gez. Felor BadenbergBerlin Senator for Justice and Consumer Protection

gez. Ingmar JungHesse Minister for Agriculture and the Environment, Viticulture, Forestry, Hunting and Heimat

gez. Silke GorißenMinister for Agriculture and Consumer Protection of North Rhine-Westphalia

gez. Christine SchneiderMinister for Agriculture, Viticulture, the Environment and Forestry of Rhineland-Palatinate

gez. Georg-Ludwig von Breitenbuch MdLSaxon State Minister for the Environment and Agriculture

gez. Michael RichterMinister for Economic Affairs, Tourism, Agriculture and Forestry of Saxony-Anhalt

gez. Colette Boos-JohnMinister for Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Rural Affairs of Thuringia

Disclosure: the publisher of Die Aufrechte Lupe, Andreas W. Herb, is CEO of the MBG Group. By his own account the group of companies is reformulating drinks recipes and is itself affected by the planned tax. His opinion on it is set out in the essay “Die Steuer, die sich selbst widerlegt”.