Klingbeil's comments came in response to an internal finance ministry paper that leaked on August 25 and sparked controversy. The document had proposed extending the planned levy beyond sugary soft drinks to cover zero- and light-sugar products containing sweeteners, as well as beer mixes, oat drinks and ready-to-drink coffees. Alcohol-free beer and wine, juices made from concentrate, and fruit nectars were also included in the draft proposal, while pure fruit juices and plain milk were to remain exempt.
Klingbeil characterized the paper as an internal working document reflecting technical discussions among ministries, rather than an agreed political position. "A working paper of this kind has now been published in the media. It is neither politically motivated nor has it been decided upon by the coalition," he said, adding that ministry staff need room to debate ideas openly, including proposals that are ultimately discarded.
He confirmed that a tax on sugar-containing drinks remains planned as agreed by the governing coalition, with details still being finalized, and reiterated his support for measures addressing the health impacts of high sugar consumption, particularly among children.
The sugar tax is intended to take effect from 2027, tied to efforts to stabilize Germany's statutory health insurance finances. The cabinet had originally set a 2028 start date when agreeing key figures for the 2027 federal budget on April 29, 2026. The government has budgeted €650 million in revenue from the tax for 2027, and at least €450 million annually from 2028 onward.
The leaked proposal drew criticism from within the government. The agriculture ministry, led by the Christian Social Union (CSU), had already publicly rejected the broader scope outlined in the finance ministry paper. Within the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, health policy spokeswoman Simone Borchardt said the plan strayed from its original health objective, while the CDU-linked Wirtschaftsrat business council argued that including sweeteners in the levy suggested the real goal was to raise budget revenue rather than improve public health.
