In some countries, an increasing number of people are suffering from health problems as a result of eating too much fast food. It is, therefore, necessary for governments to impose a higher tax on this kind of food. Do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
It is argued that governments should impose a tax on junk foodlevy a tariff on junk food because the number of health risks associated with consuming this kind of food is on the rise. This essay agrees that a higher rate of tax should be paid by fast-food companies. Firstly, alcohol and tobacco companies already pay higher taxes and secondly, higher taxes could raise prices and lower consumption. Higher excise taxesHigher excise on liquorliqueur and cigarettes has proven to be successful at curbing the harm caused by these substances. This revenue has been used to treat health problems associated with these products and has also funded advertising campaignshas proven useful in advertising campaigns warning people about the dangers of alcohol and tobacco abuse. Tax revenue from fast-food salesTax from fast food could be used in the same way. The United Kingdom is a prime example, where money from smokers is used to treat lung cancer and heart disease. Increasing taxes would raise prices and lower consumption. Fast food companies would pass on these taxes to consumers in the form of higher prices and this would lead to people not being able to afford junk food because it is too expensive. Junk food would soon become a luxury item and it would only be consumed occasionally, which would be less harmful to public healththe general public’s health. For instance, the cost of organic food is prohibitively expensivehas proven prohibitively expensive for most people and that is why only a small percentage of the population buy it regularly. In conclusion, junk food should be taxed at a higher rate because of the good precedent set by alcohol and tobacco and the fact that the increased cost should reduce the amount of fast food people buythe amount of fast-food people buy.
Why this response received Band 8.0
The response presents a clear position and develops two relevant reasons with strong logical progression and generally precise language. Its main limitation is that the organic-food comparison is only an indirect illustration of how higher prices affect fast-food consumption, while a few word choices are imprecise. A more directly evidenced example and tighter tax-related vocabulary would make the argument more compelling.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The position is clear throughout, and both reasons are relevant, extended, and supported.
Use a more direct example of a fast-food tax changing purchasing behaviour to strengthen the second argument.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas progress logically from the thesis through two focused arguments to a concise conclusion.
Make the transition from the tobacco precedent to its application to fast food slightly more explicit.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is wide and generally precise, with effective topic-specific phrasing despite a few imprecise choices.
Replace terms such as tariff and liqueur with the exact tax and tobacco-related vocabulary intended.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A wide range of sentence structures is used accurately, with only minor lapses that do not impede meaning.
Refine punctuation and article use in the few densely coordinated sentences for even greater control.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
In some countries, an increasing number of people are suffering from health problems as a result of eating too much fast food. It is, therefore, necessary for governments to impose a higher tax on this kind of food. Do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.