“Unregistered lobby managed to remove beer and spirits from the Financing Act”
Noticias Uno reports:
“As a result of the debates that led to the approval of the budget law, the budget shortfall will no longer be 26 billion, as the government had hoped, but 16 billion, as approved by Congress. The main tax that disappeared from the financing bill that is part of the budget was the tax on beer.
“Blanca Llorente: We think it is a big mistake that the part of the tax proposal that was best designed and had the greatest positive social impact is the one that is being sacrificed in the cutbacks. It is regrettable.
“Commentator: Government and opposition MPs joined forces to remove beer from the list of products that were expected to provide funding.
Blanca Llorente: Beer is the main product of all the litres of alcohol consumed in Colombia, accounting for 94% of the total. And alcohol is alcohol from a health perspective.
“Commentator: Government MPs warn that an agreement was sought, but the decision came from the Nariño Palace itself.
Representative Tamara Argote: Those of us who have been defending healthy taxes will maintain our position on insisting on these taxes on alcoholic beverages.
Commentator: Driven by the National Federation of Departments, which is sponsored by foreign liquor and cigarette distributors, the lobby quietly won the debate.
Representative Tamara Argote: In the Congress of the Republic, there is a very, very important lobby of companies, from the EPS, from alcohol producers and tobacco producers.
Blanca Llorente: There has always been a lot of pressure from commercial interests that are very powerful in influencing the highest levels of power, both in Congress and in government.”
“Raising taxes on tobacco and alcohol: more evidence in favour of health benefits than of the risk of smuggling”
Colombia Check reports:
“The positive effects on public health have much more support than that alleged risk of smuggling. Several studies show that these measures discourage the consumption of harmful substances while increasing the care for the problems they cause, such as respiratory diseases, cardiovascular and different types of cancer.
The discussion has gained relevance in the midst of the processing of the new draft Financing Law of the government of Gustavo Petro, the tax reform that is currently underway in Congress. The initiative, which aims to support the unfunded General Budget of the Nation by 2026, would increase and transform the way in which tobacco and alcohol are taxed. …
“Among those who have spoken out most strongly against these taxes is Esteban Ramos Maya, manager of the Antioquia Liquor Factory (FLA). According to a message he posted on X on 2 September, the reform ‘would lead to a huge increase in prices, triggering a surge in smuggling and encouraging the purchase of adulterated liquor’. …
The strategy is not new. Studies sponsored by the tobacco industry have already inflated figures that favor the narrative that the price increase would generate a favorable gap for contraband products.”
Assessment
A coordinated and largely unregistered lobbying push by the alcohol industry managed to remove the proposed taxes on beer and spirits from the Financing Act currently debated in Congress. The deletion reduces the expected fiscal revenue by 10 billion pesos, while undermining one of the most socially beneficial components of the reform.
Blanca Llorente criticised the outcome, noting that beer represents 94% of all alcohol consumed in Colombia and that “alcohol is alcohol from a health perspective.” Lawmakers defending pro-health taxes, including Representative Tamara Argote, confirmed that the lobbying push was backed by the National Federation of Departments, highly dependent on the profits from alcohol production.
Alcohol policy advocates have taken to the media to challenge the alcohol industry’s claims. A detailed fact-check published by ColombiaCheck dismantled claims that raising alcohol taxes increased smuggling. Drawing on existing research, the article shows that evidence overwhelmingly supports the health and fiscal benefits of such taxes, while the smuggling narrative has been repeatedly amplified by industry actors to block reform.
This case of conflict of interest and political interference underlines how entrenched alcohol-industry influence continues to shape national fiscal and public health policy.
The exposure of these tactics not only underlines the need for more ambitious and transparent tax policy but also highlights the importance of media, expert, and peoples voices in countering commercial misinformation.