Australians do like alcohol. From different tastes of beer to wine, from brandy to the charming whiskey, Excessive drinking and abuse has become one of the most important social problems (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009)., more important is that the alcohol drinking groups in Australia trend to be younger, and the younger alcohol abuse continues to rise (AIHW, 2002), especially the women (Parliament of Australia (2009)).. In order to avoid the growth of this phenomenon, to make the society develop healthily, Australian government announced the tax on RTD to increase. The Australian government did this policy for deal with younger alcohol abuse. Indeed it worked but just a little. The producers use other alcohol to substitute, which caused younger turn to liquor and other alcohol drinking. This essay will firstly discuss was the government’s stated explanation for the increase in the tax on RTD. Following this, it will discuss the affects of the tax on RTD market. After that it will look at the affects of the tax on other beverage. Finally, it will discuss whether the policy has successful.
Concerning the government’s stated explanation for the increase in the tax on RTD, alcohol drinking is very popular in the whole country (Collins, D.J and Lesley, H.M. 1996), Younger (12-25 years old) take alcohol at a risk rate especially young women, which has regarded as a grievous sanitation around the whole commonality society (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009). Also the use of RTDS shows increasing condition, RTD is the fist choice for younger among beverage.Young You Exorbitant alcohol drinking did has brought harm to the citizen, Along with Exceeding RTD drinking caused so many affection such as violence in short time drinking, caused such as cancer(Dept. Human Services, 2002) if in long term.
In the background of creating resilient ecosystems and active community the government did this strategy to reducing the consumptions of RTDS by economic levers (Crosbie, D. 2002), to reducing younger Australian abandon themselves to RTD and  lead to positive health result ,also improving the health and wellbeing of all people.
The affects of the tax on RTD market mainly includes the importers decreased RTD consumption as well as producers, which showed from the ATO clearance date; the growth of consumption about RTD became slowly; from AC Nielsen date we can know consumption reduced; from Scan Track date we conclude the RTD decreased as well as AC Nielsen date.
Above all, along with the increase of tax on RTD, consumption of RTD reduced whatever the output also the use.
The market for other alcoholic beverages implies that along with the increase tax in RTD, alternative beverage are promoting as the substitution such as full-strength
From the ATO date full-strength spirit increased as well as beer; AC Liquor date shows the same conclusions about the beer consumption, also shows wine consumption reduced but spirits increased.
Above all, as the need for alcohol in Australia do not reduce, as the government  increase tax on RTD as a economical lever to reduce consumption of RTD, the people turn to others alcohol (Dept. Human Services, 2002) which can substitute RTD such as full-strength and spirit, which will lead to the output and consumption of them increase.
I do not think this tax would ultimately have been successful in terms of its stated aims, it can be explained by the following factors:
The most important is that the ones who just drink RTD turn to the liquor, also the producers try to develop others products to substitute RTD for avoiding tax, some have defined as beer but similar to RTD. Which is cheaper but have the same taste and ingredient? In the cheap stimulus the younger turn to liquor and others.
After that, other substitution alcoholic drinking are sued for substituting  RTD which was proved by date of Nielsen and consumption of full-strength increased which was proved by the date of  TDA, also it shows that there also have others for substitute RTD.
Then, about the gain, government want to use the gain on the increased tax to improving welfare of health, but related data shows the assumption did not come true as the budgets estimated, just estimated less gain along with the increased tax on RTD.
Above all, the decisive factor to judge whether a policy is successful is to compare the aim and result. The policy has carry into execution to reduce the younger who drink alcohol drinking ,but caused more younger turn to liquor and others which is similar to the RTD even higher alcohol, the aim did not come true; also it caused other alcohol beverage increased. So I do not think it has successfully.
In conclusion, the Australian government did this policy for deal with younger alcohol abuse. Indeed it worked but just a little. From different tastes of beer to wine, from brandy to the charming whiskey, Excessive drinking and abuse has become one of the most important social problems (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009)., more important is that the alcohol drinking groups in Australia trend to be younger, and the younger alcohol abuse continues to rise (AIHW, 2002), especially the women (Parliament of Australia, 2009). Also the use of RTDS shows increasing condition, RTD is the fist choice for younger among beverage. In order to avoid the growth of this phenomenon, to make the society develop healthily, Australian government announced the tax on RTD to increase. The producers use other alcohol to substitute, which caused younger turn to liquor and other alcohol drinking. In fact alcohol abuse can not stop just depending on the tax, what the government should teach how the family led the younger treat alcohol drinking, as the younger begin to drink alcohol affected by their family.

References
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2002) 2001 National Drug Strategy Household Survey: State and Territory Supplement. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
Collins, D.J and Lesley, H.M. (1996) The Social Cost of drug abuse in Australia in 1988 and 1992. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health, Australian Government Publishing Service.
Crosbie, D. (2002) A Public Health Perspective on Alcohol Excise and Taxation: A Submission to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee. Personal communication.
Commonwealth of Australia, (2009). Standing Committee on Community Affairs Excise Tariff Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009 [Provisions] Customs Tariff Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009 [Provisions] and the impact of the tax on ready-to-drink alcoholic beverages. ISBN 978-1-74229-073-7
Parliament of Australia (2009) Inquiry into Excise Tariff Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009 and Customs Tariff Amendment (2009 Measures No. 1) Bill 2009. Parliament of Australia, Canberra.
Victorian Department of Human Services. (2002) Victorian Alcohol Strategy Stage One. Melbourne: Victorian Department of Human Services.