TOEFL iBT (Writing for Academic Discussion)2026

Your professor is teaching a class on public policy. Write a post responding to the professor's question. In your response you should express and support your opinion. Professor: "Governments are increasingly debating whether to raise taxes on unhealthy products such as sugary drinks and junk food. If you had to choose, would you support or oppose such a tax? Why?"

- Time pressure: 10 minutes total. Aim for roughly 120 well-chosen words rather than padding to a target length. - Vocabulary should be accurate and natural rather than fancy. Showy words used incorrectly cost more than they earn. - Address the professor's question directly and engage with at least one classmate-style angle (cost, fairness, effectiveness). - The Power column upgrades word choice without changing meaning or grammar structure.

Taxing unhealthy products — academic discussion response

The boring draft

Score: 3 / 5

I support taxing sugary drinks and junk food, even though I understand the worries Marco raised about fairness to lower-income families. The health costs of diabetes and obesity already fall on those same families, so doing nothing is not a neutral choice. Mexico's 2014 soda tax brought a measurable drop in consumption within two years, especially in poorer households — exactly the group critics worried would be hurt most. To address Lisa's point about freedom, I would make the revenue for free school meals and subsidised fresh produce. That way the tax stops harmful choices while making healthy ones genuinely affordable. A tax that punishes corporations selling junk food, with the proceeds going straight back to the families most affected, is not regressive — it is a smart correction.

The power upgrade

Score: 5 / 5

I firmly support taxing sugary drinks and junk food, even though I understand the reservations Marco raised about fairness to lower-income families. The health burden of diabetes and obesity already fall disproportionately on those same families, so doing nothing is not a neutral choice. Mexico's 2014 soda tax produced a measurable drop in consumption within two years, especially in poorer households — exactly the group critics feared would be harmed most. To address Lisa's point about personal autonomy, I would earmark the revenue for free school meals and subsidised fresh produce. That way the tax discourages harmful choices while expanding healthy ones genuinely affordable. A tax that targets corporations selling junk food, with the proceeds flowing straight back to the families most affected, is not regressive — it is a carefully designed correction.