Last updated: 10/12/2025
Apply a minimum unit price (MUP) to alcohol in England
Apply a minimum unit price (MUP) to alcohol in England across in-trade and off-trade businesses, similar to what exists in Scotland and Wales
- Moderate impact on obesity
A percentage estimate of how much the policy would reduce national obesity rates
- Relative reduction in obesity prevalence: 1%
- Although this policy has limited impact for reducing national obesity rates, it is beneficial for other health outcomes including certain cancers, liver disease and mental wellbeing
- Low evidence quality
A rating of the strength of evidence, accounting for both reliability and validity of the evidence
- Reliability and validity rating: 2/5
- Very low cost to governments
Cost to UK and devolved governments over 5 years
- Costs to governments over 5 years: £0.12m
- Benefit to governments per year: £0.6bn
What is the policy?
This policy focuses on whether an alcohol reduction intervention could impact national obesity rates. The policy is the introduction of minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol, an intervention which sets a floor price for alcohol per unit, preventing retailers from selling alcohol below a specified price and stopping the sale of alcohol that is cheap relative to its strength. An MUP in England could be set at 65 pence per unit of pure alcohol, which would be in line with Scotland’s uprated MUP (uprated from 50p to 65p in April 2024). MUP is not a tax, and does not generate tax revenue for the government. Therefore, it is separate from the alcohol duty that the UK government enacted in 2024.
For working-age adults who drink alcohol, it is estimated that approximately 7% of their calories come from alcohol. According to the Royal Society for Public Health, one unit of alcohol contains eight grams or 10ml of alcohol which provides 56 calories (kcal). Not only do people gain calories from the alcohol itself, but also from other aspects of the drink too. For example, spirits may also frequently be accompanied by soft drinks (ie, mixers) containing sugar. Furthermore, alcoholic beverages may also be consumed alongside calorific snacks or meals, and there is some evidence that people will consume more food while drinking than they would typically, as well as crave more ‘junk food’ while drinking or the day after.
Though the relationship between drinking alcohol and BMI is not clear-cut, alcohol intake may be a risk factor for obesity in some individuals. Harmful levels of alcohol consumption, in particular, seem to be associated with obesity. Frequent binge drinking also seems associated with obesity, though frequent alcohol consumers were less likely to have obesity (ie, those who drank regularly but did not binge).
Given the possible links between obesity and alcohol, reducing the consumption of alcohol could potentially benefit weight, as individuals consume fewer calories. Minimum unit pricing (MUP) might be an effective approach to reducing alcohol consumption and its associated harms (eg, Purshouse et al., 2010; Stockwell et al., 2012).
Recent context
An MUP was implemented by the government in Scotland in 2018 and in Wales in 2020, but no such policy currently exists in England. Scotland became the first country to set a strength-based floor price for alcohol, imposing a minimum price of 50 pence per unit (8g) of pure alcohol. Public Health Scotland concluded overall there were positive health impacts of the MUP, including on alcohol-related inequalities (see a brief summary here, or more detailed information here).
The MUP policy in Scotland had a sunset clause, meaning it would lapse after six years (2018 to 2024), unless it was extended by the Scottish Parliament following an impact report led by Public Health Scotland. In April 2024, the Scottish Parliament voted to maintain and uprate the MUP to 65p per unit.
In July 2025, the 10 Year Health Plan for England was announced; it included an aim to introduce new standards for alcohol labelling in an effort to tackle harmful alcohol consumption.
Case studies
Scotland
In 2018, Scotland became the first country in the world to set a strength-based floor price for alcohol. The MUP was set at 50p per unit of alcohol. After an evaluation process, the Scottish Parliament opted to maintain and uprate the MUP to 65p per unit. The evaluation suggested the MUP reduced alcohol sales by 3%, as well as being estimated to reduce deaths directly caused by alcohol consumption by 13.4% and hospital admissions by 4.1%. There was less consistent evidence of impact, positive or negative, on other health outcomes. Prior to implementation of the MUP in Scotland, some retailers did not understand MUP and were concerned about the burden associated with implementation. However, contrary to concerns, small retailers reported minimal disruption. Moreover, some noted they felt the MUP allowed them to compete with larger retailers and supermarkets.
Considerations for implementation
The economic impacts of an MUP should be assessed, as well as any administration and compliance costs for the scheme. Additionally, the disproportionate financial burden on low-income families if prices rise should be considered.
This policy might be best implemented as part of a package of alcohol policies if government revenue is not to be affected. A report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) in 2020 found that MUP works better if implemented alongside reformed alcohol taxes. They noted that an alcohol MUP is reasonably well targeted at heavy drinkers, but could hinder competition and reduce revenue from tax. In order to limit a fall in revenue for the Treasury but still target heavy drinking, the IFS suggested an MUP be combined with a more coherent set of taxes.
Consideration will also need to be given to help retailers understand an MUP and its implementation. However, during the implementation of an MUP in Scotland, a qualitative study of small retailers found that many small retailers’ initial concerns about the policy and associated implementation were not borne out in reality, with implementation generally considered to be straightforward by the small retailers who were interviewed.
Estimating the population impact
We estimated that this policy would reduce the prevalence of adult UK obesity rates by approximately 1%
Estimating the per-person impact
We estimated that this policy would reduce average daily calorie intake weighted by drinking behaviour, by approximately 3.5 kcal per person (this varies depending on an individual’s drinking behaviour)
- Our modelling was based on an interrupted time-series analysis by Robinson et al. (2021) which analysed outcomes from Scotland’s MUP.
- We assumed that the minimum unit price would be 65p per unit of pure alcohol (adjusted for inflation following Scotland’s 2018 50p MUP).
- We assumed that the MUP would only impact beverages sold in a retail setting. We assumed it would not affect drinks sold in the out of home sector because the prices are already high in these settings (ie, typically above 65p per unit already). Of note, a spot check was carried out comparing the price of alcoholic beverages between different outlets of a leading pub chain in the UK to validate this assumption. This is further supported by evidence from other research on MUP.
- We needed to calculate the change in calorie intake from an MUP. Alcoholic drinks directly contribute calories in two ways:
- kcals in the ethanol itself; and
- kcals in the other drink ingredients, eg, sugar.
- To calculate the change in calorie intake, we considered the following:
- We first needed to establish the baseline consumption of alcohol for the population. We took the baseline of pure alcohol consumption per year (measured in litres) in England from this evidence paper by Robinson et al. (2021). Then, using the most popular drinks in each category, we estimated the total calories from alcohol (calories from ethanol and calories from other components in a drink, eg, sugar) per person per year, week and day.
- However, given that drinking behaviour varies across the population (ie, different people consume different numbers of units per week), we adjusted the baseline calorie intake from alcohol to account for this. We did this by estimating the mean number of units of alcohol that people in different drinking behaviour groups consume using Health Survey England 2019 data. We adjusted the total calories from alcohol per week by the variation in the mean units of alcohol per week by drinking behaviour group.
- Then, we applied the effect size taken from Robinson et al. (2021) (ie, a 3.5% reduction) on the adjusted baseline calories from alcohol to estimate the reduction in daily calories from alcohol per person by drinking behaviour. We apply this reduction in intake only to those living with a BMI >=25.
- Consistent with other policies in the toolkit, we assumed a compensation effect of 23% (ie, that people would not get the full benefit of the MUP policy because they might compensate for the initial drinking behaviour weighted calorie reduction of 3.5 kcal, leading to a net drinking behaviour weighted reduction of 2.7 kcal post-compensation).
Estimating the population reach
In our analytical model, we applied the effect sizes to people living with overweight or obesity. For adults, that is people aged 18 or above with a BMI of 25+ and demonstrating a drinking behaviour. We do not estimate the impact of this policy on children.
Changes in the prevalence of people living with obesity
We find that as a result of this policy the percentage reduction in prevalence of obesity is approximately 1%.
Table 1 shows the percentage of adults moving from BMI ≥ 30 into a healthier BMI category following the introduction of this policy.
| Adults (England and Wales) | Children (England and Wales) | Adults (Scotland) | Children (Scotland) |
| 1% | Not applicable | In progress | Not applicable |
Cost and benefits
Cost over 5 years
We estimated that this policy would cost the governments approximately £0.12 million over five years (not including loss of tax revenue; see table 2 for details)
A government impact assessment was used to estimate costs. Table 2 below shows a breakdown of costs over a five-year period. The upfront costs to the government are estimated at approximately £0.12 million over five years for transition costs and enforcement of the policy (taken from a 2012 UK government impact assessment for MUP in England and adjusted for inflation to 2019). An MUP policy is also expected to lead to a loss of government revenue from alcohol duty and excise duty, amounting to £2.9 billion over five years. The costs to the food industry are estimated at £6 million over five years.
| Group affected | Cost | Horizon | Detail |
| Costs | |||
| Government | £0.12m | One-off | Transition costs – involves informing businesses, training officers |
| Revenue lost | |||
| Government | £2.9bn | Over 5 years | Loss of tax receipts |
| Industry | |||
| Industry | £6m | One-off | Implementation costs – training employees, updating labels |
Total annual benefit
We estimated that this policy would have an annual benefit of approximately £0.6 billion
Using analysis conducted by the Tony Blair Institute and Frontier Economics we estimate this policy would result in benefits of approximately £0.6 billion per year. Approximately two-thirds of this saving would benefit individuals (via quality-adjusted life years, and informal social care). The remaining third relates to savings that benefit the state via NHS treatment costs, productivity and formal social care. See our Methods page for more information about the cost breakdowns.
Behind the averages: impact on inequalities
The picture surrounding the impact on health inequalities is somewhat mixed.
On the positive side:
Public Health Scotland (2023) noted that households that bought the most alcohol before the MUP reduced their purchasing the most after it was introduced. The greatest alcohol sales reductions were seen for products that increased the most in price. Furthermore, though there were benefits seen for the whole population, reductions in hospital admissions and deaths directly caused by alcohol consumption were greatest for men and those living in the most deprived areas of Scotland. There was no consistent evidence of impact, positive or negative, on other health outcomes. Public Health Scotland concluded that the evidence overall supported that the MUP had a positive impact on health outcomes, including alcohol-related health inequalities. They also noted no clear evidence of substantial negative impacts on the alcoholic drinks industry or social harms at the population level.
Similarly, in a written evidence summary, Public Health England (PHE) noted that an MUP could have a greater impact on those who drink the most. They note that in England, a small but sizable portion of the population (~2 million in 2016) are heavy drinkers, consuming more than a third of all self-reported alcohol, and experiencing a disproportionate burden of alcohol-related health and social harm. Those people who drink at hazardous and dependent levels are likely to experience the greatest health and social benefits from an MUP; this is because PHE finds strong and consistent evidence that if alcohol becomes less affordable, its consumption and alcohol-related harm decrease. The above potentially suggests this policy might serve to reduce health inequalities.
On the negative side:
However, conversely, this policy could widen inequalities. While discouraging alcohol overconsumption might have positive health outcomes, pricing interventions tend to place a greater cost burden on lower socioeconomic groups as a percentage of income.
Furthermore, the increased cost of alcohol may displace other foods. Kopasker et al. (2022) compared Scotland (with an MUP) and the north of England (without an MUP). They found that the MUP might have displaced some household food purchasing, with the pattern of changes in food categories appearing to be less desirable from a healthy diet perspective (eg, with less spending on fruit and vegetables and more on crisps and snacks). That said, they noted these changes were relatively small.
However, the same team of researchers also found contradictory results. In their pre-print paper (ie, not yet peer-reviewed), Leckcivilize and colleagues (2022) explored whether there were unintended consequences of the MUP. They concluded that its introduction was associated with small, but beneficial, statistically significant reductions in the purchase of sugar (partly due to sugar from alcoholic drinks), and that there was no significant change in overall diet quality. Moreover, households from more deprived areas, or with greater alcohol purchases, had greater levels of sugar reduction from alcohol.
Rating the strength of evidence
We asked experts working in the fields of obesity, food, and health research to rate the strength of the evidence base for each policy, taking into account both reliability (size and consistency) and validity (quality and content) of the evidence. Policies were rated on a Likert scale of 1–5 (none, limited, medium, strong, and very strong evidence base). The Blueprint Expert Advisory Group rated this policy as having a Limited evidence base.
Expand the soft drinks industry levy
Expand the soft drinks industry levy to sweetened milk-based drinks