Alcohol harm remains preventable — and National Treasury has clear pricing options to reduce it

A massive spike in the number of motorists caught drinking and driving over the festive season is not merely a traffic problem that can be solved by traffic enforcement laws alone, we need to curb heavy and binge drinking with stronger alcohol pricing reform. 

Alcohol is a factor in 27% of fatal crashes in South Africa linked to driver error, and during the 2025/26 festive period, 8 561 motorists were arrested for driving under the influence, a 144% increase compared to the same period the year before. The period was also marked by increased risks to children, with a viral video of children drinking alcohol in the Eastern Cape, to a surge in alcohol-related violence, including multiple fatal incidents linked to clashes in taverns.

These incidents reflect a broader and well-established pattern. Alcohol continues to drive violence, injury, and pressure on public health and policing systems, particularly during periods of increased consumption.

The scale of alcohol-related harm in South Africa is not in dispute, and its impact on the health and wellbeing of children was addressed in the president’s State of the Nation address.  What remains contested, however, is how effectively public policy responds to it, particularly through pricing.

“Alcohol pricing is not just a health issue — it’s a matter of fiscal policy,” says Kashifa Ancer, Campaign Manager for Rethink Your Drink. “When excise taxes don’t keep pace with the harm caused by excessive consumption, and the cheapest alcohol stays cheap, the cycle is doomed to continue.

Cheap alcohol remains central to the problem

Evidence consistently shows that harmful drinking is driven disproportionately by the cheapest alcohol products, which are most accessible to heavy drinkers, like large-volume beer.

A South African modelling study found that over 90% of alcohol consumed by households that drink the most, is sold at R5 or less per standard drink (which contains 15 ml of pure ethanol), compared to just 9% among moderate drinkers. many of whom are in lower-income households, while current pricing policy has limited impact on those lowest-priced products.

A combined pricing approach before National TreasuryA more effective alcohol pricing framework requires excise reform and Minimum Unit Pricing to work together.

Excise reform would mean taxing alcohol consistently by ethanol content, rather than by beverage category. This would ensure that products with similar alcohol content are taxed the same way and it would reduce incentives to buy cheaper high-strength products.

Minimum Unit Pricing would complement this by setting a floor price per unit of alcohol, ensuring that producers and retailers cannot use smaller packaging, stronger products, or aggressive discounting to keep high-alcohol drinks artificially cheap. 

Together, these measures align price with harm and close the gap that allows cheap alcohol to drive predictable and preventable harm.

“Treasury has workable pricing options ahead of Budget 2026 that would protect revenue and reduce harm; the question now is whether it will use them,” Ancer adds.

Policy debate is ongoing — but options are available

In discussions on alcohol pricing, the alcohol industry has repeatedly argued that stronger pricing measures will not reduce harm effectively but rather fuel illicit trade in liquor. However, independent research  has  found no consistent link between pricing reforms and large-scale growth in illicit alcohol markets. Instead, weak enforcement and regulatory gaps remain the main drivers of illegal trade.

However, South Africa’s fiscal record shows that alcohol excise duties contribute to revenue, while international evaluations, such as Scotland’s Minimum Unit Pricing, demonstrate that targeted pricing reduces alcohol-related harm without penalising moderate drinkers.