Thanks for your comments, and they help better understand the causes. I would like to supplement as follows: (1) if the methodology of the study is by dividing the total food expenditures of the whole city (including food taken at home and not at home) by total number of population, then the arguments of (a) expensive restaurants and (b) parallel trading are valid reasons for the unreasonably high food expenditure in HK. However (2) if the methodology is by a survey of their food budget (food taken at home only), then the two arguments should have been excluded. Since there are no explicit descriptions of the methodology, it is hard to ascertain which methodology is exploited in this study. Yet, as it refers to the USDC data source, which further refers to a project titled 1996 International Comparison Project (ICP). The project descriptions mentioned that it was a survey of the household budget and did not include food consumed away from home. In other words, if this methodology applies, then restaurants’ charges and parallel trading should not be causes of the high food expenditure in HK.