Ministers should "seriously" consider revamping alcohol taxes to target the damage caused by problem drinking, a respected economic thinktank has recommended.

Revamping the duties on alcohol to make spirits and strong cider more expensive relative to other drinks would be a better option than minimum pricing if the Government wants to tackle harmful drinking, said the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).

But the thinktank cautioned ministers to be "careful" before introducing a sugar tax of the kind advocated by campaigners including TV chef Jamie Oliver, warning it could have unpredictable impacts on people's diets and would not be able on its own to bring consumption of sugar down to recommended levels.

In its Green Budget report, published ahead of Chancellor George Osborne's March 16 Budget, the IFS noted that the share of tax revenues coming from duties on alcohol, tobacco and road fuel has fallen from more than £1 in every £10 collected in the 1970s to around 72p out of every £10 now - and is set to fall further to 60p by 2020.

And it found that drink taxes are "very badly targeted at the social harms caused by alcohol consumption", because they are not focused on heavy drinkers and are levied at hugely different rates on different types of alcohol.

The duty on a litre of 7.5% strength cider is 39p, compared to £1.38 on a litre of beer of the same potency. And there has been a trend over recent years towards lower taxes on spirits, which are favoured by problem drinkers.

"The Government is said to be considering introducing a minimum price for alcohol," said the thinktank. "If it wants to tackle harmful drinking, it would be better to sort out these anomalies in duty rates and to reverse the long-term trend to lower duties on spirits, which are disproportionately consumed by heavy drinkers."

Oliver has warned he would get "more ninja" in his attacks on the Government if next month's anti-obesity strategy fails to include a policy such as a tax on sugary drinks to reduce consumption by children.

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt insisted the tax idea was "not off the table" and that "if it isn't a sugar tax, it has got to be something that is equally robust".

But the IFS warned that imposing the tax on sugary drinks alone "could simply lead people to increase other sugar consumption - perhaps by eating more chocolate, which also contains saturated fats - and in any case could not on its own bring sugar consumption down to recommended levels".

The effect of a more broad-based sugar tax on consumption of other nutrients and diet overall is "uncertain", it warned.

And implementing a sugar tax successfully would be " much harder than for traditional excise duties because diets are complicated and multi-faceted".

The IFS said: "Careful, evidence-based design and a clear understanding of its role alongside other initiatives are needed before any such policy is rolled out."